Open mike 22/12/2021

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, December 22nd, 2021 - 97 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

97 comments on “Open mike 22/12/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Jester 1
    22 December 2021 at 6:46 am

    Well this is going to stuff up a few people's plans on hoping to return home to NZ.

    Covid 19 Omicron: At least 27,000 flyers in limbo after Omicron border delay – NZ Herald

    • Pat 2.1
      22 December 2021 at 7:45 am

      The ponzi must continue ….at any and all cost.

    • kejo 2.2
      22 December 2021 at 8:11 am

      How to disadyantage New Zealanders.

    • Craig H 2.3
      22 December 2021 at 10:00 am

      In terms of meeting the criteria for the Investor visas, residential property investment has to be new developments, not just buying existing property and renting it out, nor can it include renting or selling to friends and family.

      • Molly 2.3.1
        22 December 2021 at 10:50 am

        "…residential property investment has to be new developments, not just buying existing property and renting it out, nor can it include renting or selling to friends and family."

        You mean the same criteria that allows purchase of existing homes as long as the house is removed and the site developed?

        Any overseas investment by people looking for a profit means NZers looking for a residence pay more. Loopholes so wide they can stampede through – and they do.

        • Craig H 2.3.1.1
          22 December 2021 at 12:18 pm

          Isn't that still new housing? How is that loophole?

          • Molly 2.3.1.1.1
            22 December 2021 at 12:42 pm

            It doesn't remove overseas investors from the market at all for existing houses on sites, leaving them in competition with NZers looking for a home.

            Once again, any overseas investment by people looking for a profit means NZers looking for a residence pay more.

    • RosieLee 2.4
      22 December 2021 at 11:13 am

      This is absolutely obscene.

      • Janet 2.4.1
        22 December 2021 at 1:03 pm

        Yes it is , absolutely obscene. The answer Kiwis, is do not sell to a non New Zealander nor to a "New Zealander" not born in New Zealand. Hold our land because it seems to me now that we have a nicely developed country the rich of the world are saying thanks we will take it off you peasants now.

        • Foreign Waka 2.4.1.1
          22 December 2021 at 1:54 pm

          Janet, you comment is absolutely offensive. I have been living in NZ for most of my life. I am not able to just up my tent and move to Europe if that is what you imply. That's the approach Australia takes with the NZ born/citizen ship holding law breakers, isn't it?

          I have worked in NZ for now 35 years, not drawn any benefit and clocked up to 70 hours a week to get a roof over my head. I know many people who are like me do the same. Work hard, get educated, have their kids well raised. I also know of NZlaenders who think that everybody around them owes them a living and are on a benefit for all their life.

          Perhaps you also need to know that the land your house stands on does not belong to any occupant, ultimately the Crown is he owner of all property in NZ.

          1 At the present day no person or group of persons in New Zealand, Maori or Pakeha, can fully own the land on which they have their home or farm or factory, or on which their church or marae stands. All land ultimately belongs to the State as personified by the Crown. To find the reason for this, one must go back to the feudal England of 900 years ago.

          https://www.lawcom.govt.nz/sites/default/files/projectAvailableFormats/NZLC%20PP20.pdf

          • RosieLee 2.4.1.1.1
            22 December 2021 at 6:19 pm

            We're not talking about people who have lived and worked here all their lives. We're talking about the parasitic rich listers who are being admitted to NZ as part of the scams they are doing in their own countries. And we're letting them in so they can buy land and property here and screw Kiwis. It is obscene.

        • alwyn 2.4.1.2
          22 December 2021 at 4:13 pm

          You do realise that if your rule had been in place the Labour Prime Ministers Michael Joseph Savage, Peter Fraser and Walter Nash would never have been allowed to buy a house here?

        • Blazer 2.4.1.3
          22 December 2021 at 7:50 pm

          No chance Janet.

          Money talks.

  3. Dennis Frank 3
    22 December 2021 at 7:43 am

    Trump crowd boos Trump for getting boosted: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/20/trump-covid-19-booster-shot-crowd-boos

    “Don’t! Don’t! Don’t! Don’t! Don’t!” Trump told the crowd, waving off their reaction with his hand.

    Only five consecutive don'ts was probably insufficient. Advertising theory has been based on triple-repetition for a century due to the thickness of consumers, but Trump crowds are likely to be at least twice as thick as the average consumer.

    However, hand-waving was probably worth two or three repetitions. The Queen does it routinely so we can assume it is an effective tactic with crowds.

    • Nic the NZer 3.1
      22 December 2021 at 8:22 am

      It seems we will need to start thinking of the Trump movement as a genuine peoples movement. It seems to have an independent agenda from its leader now.

      • Gezza 3.1.2
        22 December 2021 at 9:49 am

        Listening to Trump talking on the mic it's the usual typical Trump "word salad" sophistry.

        He doesn’t need to worry about any supporters who boo what he says. They’ll still go home and recall something in whatever he says (probably totally contradictory) that justifies their continued belief in him as the saviour of America.

        • Pat 3.1.2.1
          22 December 2021 at 5:35 pm

          All they need to know is hes not the establishment (no matter that he is worse)….the establishment have screwed them so anyone (and I mean anyone) who rails against them is going to get their support.

          Are they wrong?

      • millsy 3.1.3
        22 December 2021 at 1:38 pm

        Trump's support base is the grassroots proletarian revolutionary movement that the left can only dream of mobilizing.

      • Gezza 3.2.1
        22 December 2021 at 10:04 am

        One would think Rittenhouse would go home and keep a low profile, thanking his lucky stars that he's free and not doing time in the Big House.

        But, not in America. Notoriety is as good for getting you adulation there as being a genuine hero.

        • RedLogix 3.2.1.1
          22 December 2021 at 10:16 am

          One would think Rittenhouse would go home and keep a low profile,

          You would think so, but the damage had already been done. No attempt at 'living a quiet life' was going to work, he was going to be hounded the rest of his life regardless.

          So in the spirit of 'the best defense is a good offense' he's probably been advised to go as big as possible.

          • Gezza 3.2.1.1.1
            22 December 2021 at 10:43 am

            Just amps up the temperature encouraging more would-be vigilantes to get their AR15s and shoot at their fellow citizens. Which in turn will probably result in their political opponents arming up as well.

            Gun nuts have been given too much encouragement under Trump.

            • Drowsy M. Kram 3.2.1.1.1.1
              22 December 2021 at 11:51 am

              yes

            • Puckish Rogue 3.2.1.1.1.2
              22 December 2021 at 6:44 pm

              How about, and this is just a suggestion, that you don't threaten to kill someone thats carrying a rifle, that you don't physically assault someone carrying a rifle, that you don't chase someone carrying a rifle, that you don't try to grab someones rifle, that you don't chase someone carrying a rifle, that you don't point a pistol at someone carrying a rifle and that when someone points a rifle at you trying to make you stop chasing them that you…stop chasing them

              Again Kyle Rittenhouse broke no laws however the people he shot defending himself certainly did.

              • Blazer …
                22 December 2021 at 7:53 pm

                Maybe he could run for…Congress.

              • Gezza …
                22 December 2021 at 8:29 pm

                …Kyle Rittenhouse broke no laws however the people he shot defending himself certainly did.

                The problem with Kyle Rittenhouse is the problem with America. He’s a gun nut. He came from out of state to act as a vigilante.

                He was lucky the judge dismissed the charge that as he was as a minor he was not permitted to carry that AR15; the law had an exemption that was apparently intended to permit 17 year olds to carry long barrelled weapons for hunting, but it was not specifically so worded, so the judge dismissed that charge.

                The dude didn’t need to be there. As I’ve said, if he now goes around acting like a celebrity (orvlets himself get used by people like the NRA) it’s likely to encourage others to do the same thing when protests or riots happen. There’s plenty of evidence Democrat voters are arming up as well these days.

                One day there’ll likely be a confrontation of armed vigilantes from both sides that gets out of hand. There’s just too many guns in the community in the US. Kids doing school shootings have no trouble getting their later-bloodied hands on them.

                It’s too late to stop it. US citizens just have to learn to live with mass shootings, schhol shootings, & neighbourhood arguments between ordinary citizens ending up with people shot.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  22 December 2021 at 9:01 pm

                  Gezza you don't know what you're talking about.

                  You think you do but your opinions on this have been shaped by the media.

                  'The problem with Kyle Rittenhouse is the problem with America.'

                  – He was defending himself. If you do not or don't want to understand this then all it shows is you didn't follow the trial (I did)

                  'He’s a gun nut.'

                  – Based on what? What makes him a gun nut? That he legally owns a firearm? Wheres the proof hes a gun nut?

                  'He came from out of state to act as a vigilante.'

                  – Fuck off with this bullshit. Tell me what is so bad about coming 'out of state', no seriously explain to me why this is something that needs to be mentioned

                  Are americans not allowed to travel? Is he not allowed to travel to the city where he works because its out of state?

                  So come on tell me why this is something that needs to mentioned.

                  He went there to help clean up and defend the area, there are pictures of him literally cleaning graffiti off the walls

                  He was running away from and only shot when someone was close enough to grab his rifle, to hit him with a skateboard, when someone kicked him in the head and when someone pointed an, illegal, pistol at him

                  So fuck off with that vigilante shit

                  'He was lucky the judge dismissed the charge that as he was as a minor he was not permitted to carry that AR15; the law had an exemption that was apparently intended to permit 17 year olds to carry long barrelled weapons for hunting, but it was not specifically so worded, so the judge dismissed that charge.'

                  – Its not fucking luck when its the law. The law was changed because youths were going around with sawn off shotguns.

                  'The dude didn’t need to be there.'

                  – You know who else didn't need to be there, the rioters destroying property and assaulting people however whether or not he he shouldn't have been there he was allowed to be there.

                  'As I’ve said, if he now goes around acting like a celebrity (orvlets himself get used by people like the NRA) it’s likely to encourage others to do the same thing when protests or riots happen.'

                  – Hes going to need a lot of money because the twitter mob will do everything they can to make sure his life as difficult as possible

                  'There’s plenty of evidence Democrat voters are arming up as well these days.'

                  – Then how about the rioters don't riot, how about they protest legally and peacefully.

                  Or is ok to riot if you're on the left

                  'One day there’ll likely be a confrontation of armed vigilantes from both sides that gets out of hand.'

                  – Kyle isn't a vigilante but then maybe the democratic could fund the police instead of defunding them, sort out the bail laws instead of releasing the crims

                  'There’s just too many guns in the community in the US. Kids doing school shootings have no trouble getting their later-bloodied hands on them.'

                  – Maybe there is maybe there isn't but that doesn't mean Kyle should be found guilty of something he didn't do

                  'It’s too late to stop it. US citizens just have to learn to live with mass shootings, schhol shootings, & neighbourhood arguments between ordinary citizens ending up with people shot.'

                  – Again Kyle is innocent, sending him to prison wouldn't change anything but maybe the media and the Democratic party stopping stoking the flames might help

                  So stop putting this on the shoulders of an 18 year old that defended himself from violent, rapists and domestic abusers

                  • Gezza …
                    22 December 2021 at 11:37 pm

                    There’s a lot in what you wrote above that I accept is perfectly true.

                    The rioters were out of control, but solo armed citizens coming to that sort of situation runs the risk of matters getting even more out of hand than they already were. And that’s exactly what happened.

                    I know the kid was attacked, was scared, & was legitimately defending himself from the point where he was threatened & then attacked.

                    I’m never going to defend rioters. The ratbags were looting, burning, & trashing their own bloody neighbourhood. The fact the police didn’t want to act to control it was no doubt institutional paralysis brought on by their Mayor’s & Commander’s fear of provoking even worse violence.

                    The Defund The Police campaign was utterly stupid – woke nonsense. You can’t just take police off the streets & imagine all will be somehow be peaceful & peachy.

                    A vigilante is a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate. You can argue his joining a group of armed citizens “protecting businesses” is not vigilantism, but to my mind it is.

                    I don’t think he should have been convicted at his trial (even the firearms charge that was dismissed was only a misdemeanor). It was clearly self defence & even Biden said the verdict should be respected.

                    My main criticism is that he should not become a poster boy for more young people of either the left or right to do the same thing.

                    As to his life now going to be wretched & he being subject to attacks on Twitter, threats etc. If he wanted to avoid that, he shouldn’t have gone there. His actions have had these consequences. Neither you nor I can change that.

              • millsy …
                22 December 2021 at 9:52 pm

                We all know that you want the USA to go back to the days where blacks were lynched and beaten by racist cops who were in turn protected by their mates on the bench.

                You clearly see that people with criminal convictions and civil rights protesters are outside the law and deserve to be gun down by racist, homophobic right wing thugs like KR.

                KR is a really nasty piece of work, racist, homophobic, misogynistic and will probably grow up to be a wife beating skinhead.

                His mother, she is probably a total Karen who has nothing but hatred for those 'fags' and 'niggers'.

                The USA is so close to having civil rights rolled back, it's just not funny.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  22 December 2021 at 9:58 pm

                  'KR is a really nasty piece of work, racist, homophobic, misogynistic and will probably grow up to be a wife beating skinhead.'

                  – Link or evidence please Millsy

                  'His mother, she is probably a total Karen who has nothing but hatred for those 'fags' and 'niggers'.'

                  – Thats a definite link or evidence Millsy. You just crossed the line going after his mother.

                  Isn't it also interesting that one of the guys he shot defending himself is actually on camera yelling out the n word

                  Isn't it also interesting that two of the guys shot were actual domestic abusers

                  • millsy …
                    22 December 2021 at 10:12 pm

                    All of the civil rights protestors that KR gunned down in cold blood had served their time. Not everyone things that people should pay for their crimes for the rest of their lives.

                    Kyles mother is fair game. She is the one who spent 17 years filling his head full of racist, homophobic poison, going on and on about how those 'niggers' have 'too much rights' and they need to be taught a lesson, just like her 'peepaw' did back on the plantation in 1855.

                    • millsy …
                      22 December 2021 at 10:13 pm

                      Why dont you just admit, Puck, that you want the USA to return to the days of the KKK and lynching, and segregation and where cops could just kill people and get away with it.

                      You are on record, as saying that Chauvin did nothing wrong and that George Floyd was a dirty ‘nigger’ who deserveed to die.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      22 December 2021 at 10:23 pm

                      Link, proof or evidence Millsy

                    • millsy []
                      22 December 2021 at 10:33 pm

                      All in your history.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      22 December 2021 at 10:36 pm

                      Link to my history, copy and paste my history or provide evidence Millsy or be prepared to have a nice, little time out to think things over.

                    • higherstandard …
                      23 December 2021 at 1:42 pm

                      Clean up on aisle 3 !

        • Puckish Rogue 3.2.1.2
          22 December 2021 at 6:38 pm

          Do I point out here that according to:

          Drone footage Kyle was innocent

          Independent camera footage Kyle was innocent

          The prosecutions own witnesses Kyle was innocent

          The trial where he was declared not guilty

          What part of this do you disagree with?

          'One would think Rittenhouse would go home and keep a low profile'

          And do what exactly, he has a target on his back and the twitter mob will not stop trying to ruin his life:

          https://www.newsweek.com/kyle-rittenhouse-ban-arizona-state-university-1654323

          You think thats the only thing he'll have to face?

          He goes for a job and the twitter mob will call for that business to fire him or be blacklisted

          You think he'll get a government job with this current administration

          I'll remind you that Kyle Rittenhouse broke no laws, was threatened, was assaulted, had an illegal firearm pointed at him and was found not guilty

          Lay low, sure if only it was that easy for him

        • Pat 3.2.1.3
          22 December 2021 at 8:08 pm

          Not just adulation but normally a fairly solid income stream

  4. Dennis Frank 4
    22 December 2021 at 8:31 am

    Dame Anne Salmond targets "neo-liberal ideology, the Fourth Labour Government" and the judiciary:

    the Court of Appeal effectively rewrote Te Tiriti. Setting aside the original text, the judges ruled that Te Tiriti established a ‘partnership between two races’ based on ‘fiduciary’ principles, not unlike a business partnership.

    The logic of Three Waters governance seems to arise from this neo-liberal rewriting of Te Tiriti, rather than the original agreement itself. In Te Tiriti, there is no mention of ‘races,’ or ‘partnership,’ or ‘fiduciary principles.’ It speaks of taonga, not ‘assets.’

    The text of Te Tiriti describes a network of relationships among Queen Victoria, the Governor, the rangatira, the hapū and ordinary people based on chiefly gift exchange, and a promise of absolute equality between settlers and maori (which meant ‘ordinary,’ at that time) and their tikanga.

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/anne-salmond-three-waters-and-te-tiriti

    Her Cerberus is indeed a worthy target. It has produced abundant woolly thinking in recent decades. Her example:

    one would think that ancestral relationships with particular springs, aquifers, wetlands, streams, rivers and lakes would be at the heart of the matter. Instead, the reforms focus on ‘three waters’ infrastructure – reservoirs, bores, sewage ponds, pipe networks and the like.

    Neoliberalism is 19th century thinking, as is neo-colonialism, so no surprise Mahuta's advisors framed the initiative accordingly. How much longer do they believe the 19th century strangle-hold can be perpetuated? How long is a piece of string? Blind faith can make it seem to stretch forever…

    • Gezza 4.1
      22 December 2021 at 9:59 am

      I'm not quite sure what YOUR point is, Dennis, but Dame Anne absolutely nails the issue here, imo:

      Tino rangatiratanga, then, is about listening to people, and weaving them together. In its restructuring of New Zealand society, the Fourth Labour Government failed to follow these principles.

      Instead of delivering greater freedom and prosperity for ordinary people, as promised, their ‘free market’ reforms led to the entrenchment of elites, and radical inequalities in employment, housing, health, justice and education with which we are still struggling.

      Nor did the neo-liberal rewriting of Te Tiriti by the courts deliver equality or prosperity for ordinary Māori – far from it. They suffered most of all from the ‘reforms.’

      The 1980s rewriting of Te Tiriti is overdue for critical examination; and this time it should involve all parties to the original agreement, including ordinary citizens, both Māori and non-Māori.

      Open debate is the key to good governance, on the marae as in a healthy democracy.

      • Dennis Frank 4.1.1
        22 December 2021 at 11:03 am

        I'm not quite sure what YOUR point is

        There were several:

        1. The dame proved that, despite seeming a typical liberal mainstreamer, she's capable of discerning how to progress beyond that, then did so.

        2. The three-headed dog is a worthy target due to the judiciary institutionalising the ideological drivel of the 1980s, thereby confusing policy-makers.

        3. 19th century thinking that got revived to infect mainstreamers still prevails in the public service via blind faith (despite an ever-escalating infusion of Green thought & values).

    • Ad 4.2
      22 December 2021 at 11:21 am

      Dame Anne Salmond was great when writing on early-contact Maori.

      Apart from that she is a sickeningly wet Originalist that would get on well with Scalia and Barrett.

      Her head is stuck in a country that existed prior to 1840 full of untrammelled rills, Hobbiton-esque endless forest, absent of cities and intensive water management, an imagined fairyspell in which water management consisted of joyously gazing at nothing but bubbling rock-perfect founts.

      The Treaty doesn't mention wealth distribution, state entities, or local government management of water entities like dams or irrigation.

      The Treaty doesn't mention elites British or Maori, or elitism, or even class.
      It’s simply never going to do the job of a UN HR declaration or single written constitution.

      Dame Anne doesn't have the faintest idea from the evidence of that post about how Maori engage with the Crown over water governance.

      In not one single sentence of her post can we recognise the country we are in or ever could be.

      Thank God they don't let such fools anywhere near an actual decision.

      • Robert Guyton 4.2.1
        22 December 2021 at 11:35 am

        Hobbiton had no forests.

      • Dennis Frank 4.2.2
        22 December 2021 at 11:58 am

        Heh. 🙄 Guess I oughta quote her wiki, eh?

        Dame Mary Anne Salmond ONZ DBE FRSNZ is a New Zealand anthropologist, environmentalist and writer. She was New Zealander of the Year in 2013. In 2020, she was appointed to the Order of New Zealand, the highest honour in New Zealand's royal honours system.

        In 2001, Salmond became Distinguished Professor of Māori Studies and Anthropology at the University of Auckland. From 2002 to 2007, Salmond served on the boards of the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology, the Museum of New Zealand, and she was chair of the New Zealand Historic Places Trust. She was Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Equal Opportunity) at the University of Auckland from 1997 to 2006.

        One sorta gets the impression, somehow, that she ain't just a mere academic. There's plenty more in the honours & awards section that serves as suitable evidence of eminence & mana but who needs more?

        • Ad 4.2.2.1
          22 December 2021 at 6:03 pm

          She should stay in her lane.

          Great on the Treaty and early-contact history, and no experience in corporate governance, water allocation, RMA, or anything of use other than sickly nostalgia.

          • Stuart Munro 4.2.2.1.1
            22 December 2021 at 8:16 pm

            Au contraire – she like most New Zealanders has had intimate and extensive experience of the unremitting failure of neoliberalism to deliver any public goods whatsoever. It's a fine mechanism for covering civil servants' vulnerable extremities while crooks rifle a country's public assets – but as a plausible attempt at governance it is risible.

            Corporate governance? Feh.

  5. Gezza 5
    22 December 2021 at 9:36 am

    https://i.imgur.com/3Z7Jcj1.gif

    I love her big blue eyes…

  6. arkie 6
    22 December 2021 at 10:33 am

    Congratulations to the Kelloggs workers for their achievement, and our daily reminder that strikes work!

    Workers at Kellogg Co's U.S. breakfast cereal plants voted in favor of a new contract that offers better terms for transitional employees and across-the-board wage increases, ending a weeks-long strike, the company said on Tuesday.

    https://www.reuters.com/business/kellogg-strike-end-workers-vote-favor-new-contract-2021-12-21/

  7. Dennis Frank 7
    22 December 2021 at 11:16 am

    Europe adopts traffic light system for climate-change policy:

    An EU official said gas and nuclear were likely to have “amber” status, meaning they would not be in the “green” category with wind and solar power, but would feature in the taxonomy. A senior EU diplomat said they expected to see nuclear in the text because “Von der Leyen seems to have promised it to Macron and the other nuclear states”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/21/eu-in-row-over-inclusion-of-gas-and-nuclear-in-sustainability-guidance

    Greens will be thrilled at the prospect of another battle in the never-ending war between purists & pragmatists.

    The EU taxonomy became law in July 2020, but legislators left important details to be resolved through so-called delegated acts – secondary legislation meant for technical issues that is not subject to the same degree of ministerial and parliamentary oversight.

    Since then, the project has been overshadowed by a fierce political row that culminated when EU leaders meeting in Brussels last week were forced to abandon plans for a joint statement on energy policy. France wants a stamp of approval for nuclear, while Poland and eastern European states insist gas is labelled a “sustainable” investment.

    Germany’s new Social Democrat chancellor is under pressure from his Green coalition partners not to give in to pressure to include nuclear or gas in the system. Scholz downplayed the taxonomy last week as “a tiny issue on a much broader topic”.

    Oh yeah? Pull the other leg, it's got bells on.

    • RedLogix 7.1
      22 December 2021 at 11:43 am

      Thanks for picking this up Dennis. I was aware of the 'taxonomy' debate and how the Greens were doing their best to lump 'gas and nuclear' together as if they were somehow equivalent from a CO2 perspective.

      The reality is that transitioning from coal to natural gas has still been the single most effective reduction in CO2 emissions achieved so far, but no-one pretends it's the ultimate solution. Useful in the short-term for many countries with few other options on the table right now.

      The decades long irrational Green obduracy on nuclear however is in my view the single largest reason why we have a climate crisis at all. Their refusal to contemplate the one technology we do have that could reliably solve the problem, speaks to an underlying motive that has nothing to do with 'caring about the climate' whatsoever.

      As you say – the purists vs pragmatist battle is a strategy intended to ensure nothing gets done.

      • Drowsy M. Kram 7.1.1
        22 December 2021 at 12:26 pm

        Regarding the (in your opinion) "decades long irrational Green obduracy on nuclear", you must be pleased that the 'Green movement' isn't calling the shots in China's nuclear energy programme.

        Ah, the conundrum that is democracy – I'm all for it (democracy that is). But we must face facts – the nuclear energy industry hasn't done a good enough job of promoting its products, much like a few other businesses that have fallen out of favour over the years. When it comes to 'free market' capitalism, you have to take the 'bad' trends (however lamentable) with the good, and the market has spoken.

        Nuclear Power Looks to Regain Its Footing 10 Years after Fukushima
        Economics may play a stronger role than fear in steering nuclear power toward a slow decline
        Globally, the International Atomic Energy Agency estimates that nuclear power’s share of electricity production could fall from 10 percent to 6 percent by 2050 if current market, technology and resource trends continue.

        • RedLogix 7.1.1.1
          22 December 2021 at 12:47 pm

          This constant setting up of 'renewables vs nuclear' as a false dichotomy is mostly a one way street. The nuclear renaissance underway at the present rarely has anything much to say about solar/wind/battery renewables at all. If anything we regard them a bit like gas – a useful transitional technology and we're generally happy to see them take it as far as they can go.

          On the other had hit pieces on nuclear like the one you referenced above from the purist renewable crowd are a legion. They're everywhere and ultimately they're funded by vested interests, who also never want you to know about the fundamental limits of renewables and the deep social implications that arise from this.

          Because in the long-term a 'purist renewables only' human economy is a world permanently underpowered, poor, prone to resource conflict and essentially stagnant. Vernor Vinge's The Peace War anticipated something like this:

          In an effort to retain their monopoly on the Bobbler, the Peace Authority makes technological progress illegal and returns the planet to a level similar to the 19th century.

          Substitute 'climate change' for 'bobbler' and you have pretty much the same story necessarily playing out, a global tyranny stifling human progress – forever.

          • Drowsy M. Kram 7.1.1.1.1
            22 December 2021 at 1:56 pm

            On the other had hit pieces on nuclear like the one you referenced above from the purist renewable crowd are a legion. They're everywhere and ultimately they're funded by vested interests, who also never want you to know about the fundamental limits of renewables and the deep social implications that arise from this.

            RL, is it the (linked) Scientific American article by Jeremy Hsu, or is it the (embedded link to the) IEAA's Energy, Electricity and Nuclear Power Estimates for the Period up to 2050 (Reference Data Series No. 1, 2020 Edition), that's the "hit piece" “funded by vested interests” – or perhaps both? Breathtaking.

            • RedLogix 7.1.1.1.1.1
              22 December 2021 at 2:06 pm

              The words you've overlooked are: if current market, technology and resource trends continue.

              My obvious response is – these current trends should not continue. (And probably will not.)

              Incidentally it looks like the US has finally gotten it's act together – both the NRC and the DOE now have senior leaders who both understand and support the molten-salt technology and are big supporters. That's a belated but massive turnaround.

              • Drowsy M. Kram …
                22 December 2021 at 2:16 pm

                The words you've overlooked are: if current market, technology and resource trends continue.

                Nope, didn't overlook those words, and presumably neither did the author of that Scientific American "hit piece".

                Whereas you seem to have conveniently overlooked my question – what "hit piece"? Maybe your initial ‘evaluation’ was a simple reflex? Which would be fine – reflexes are natural and often a sign of good health.

                On the other had hit pieces on nuclear like the one you referenced above from the purist renewable crowd are a legion.

                • RedLogix …
                  22 December 2021 at 2:42 pm

                  I've read literally dozens of these pieces – of varying sophistication. Most are getting smart enough to avoid obvious factual errors that can be easily debunked – so increasingly the lines taken are a mix of economic and availability doubts like this article attempted.

                  Unusually this one managed to note that the Gen 4 SMR's promise to be a lot cheaper to build, but then smudged over this by arguing that renewables would dominate before any new reactor designs would come online, therefore they won't be necessary – at any price.

                  My answer is that this overlooks the limitations of SWB renewables and there is no reason why we should not have both – as they technically complement each other very well.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    22 December 2021 at 4:03 pm

                    I've read literally dozens of these pieces – of varying sophistication.

                    So, just to be clear, in your opinion Hsu's Scientific American article is a "hit piece on nuclear"? In which case it seems unlikely that any 'piece' will ever reach the level of sophistication needed to 'fool' you.

                    Imho, Hsu's article isn't a 'hit piece' – this is a 'hit piece'!

                    Why Nuclear Power Is Bad for Your Wallet and the Climate
                    [17 December 2021]
                    So the next time you hear some official, eager to appease every constituency, say we support “all of the above—we’re not picking and backing winners,” remember the retort by the dean of U.S. utility regulators, Peter Bradford: “No, we’re not picking and backing winners. They don’t need it. We’re picking and backing losers.”

      • Robert Guyton 7.1.2
        22 December 2021 at 1:25 pm

        You say, "The decades long irrational Green obduracy on nuclear however is in my view the single largest reason why we have a climate crisis at all." why you label "obduracy on nuclear" Green (with an upper-case "G")?

        Why not call it "citizen" obduracy, or "annoying to me" obduracy?

        • RedLogix 7.1.2.1
          22 December 2021 at 1:39 pm

          Yes there has been a very successful misinformation campaign that means most people are unaware that nuclear power is one of the safest, cleanest and most reliable energy sources we have. (Indeed some polls have shown that an astounding fraction of people still imagine nuclear has a massive CO2 footprint, despite it being one of the lowest.)

          However the effective political opposition is absolutely located in Green Parties all across the developed world – much to the dismay of even some of their most staunch supporters. At least that's what I understand at present – if there has been a shift in Green policies recent years I'm unaware of – I'm happy to be updated.

          • Dennis Frank 7.1.2.1.1
            22 December 2021 at 2:14 pm

            Psychological framing goes deeper.

            Ashutosh Jogalekar is a chemist interested in the history, philosophy and sociology of science:

            Many of my friends are science-loving liberals. Many of them are also environmentalists. But most of them are against nuclear energy… So here's a purely personal, short list of reasons which in my opinion drive a lot of liberal objections to nuclear power.

            1. Ignorance: This simple reason remains remarkably pervasive. I am not trying to sound preachy or elitist here but reading two or three books would greatly benefit people who have a gut reaction against nuclear energy.

            There's several objective books that presents a balanced view of the topic. As a starting point I would recommend Richard Rhodes's article in Foreign Affairs and his book Nuclear Renewal which talks about the extensive and safe deployment of nuclear energy by countries like France. Samuel Glasstone's timeless classic Sourcebook on Atomic Energy is still excellent on basics, so is Bernard Cohen's book. Gwyneth Cravens's very informative Power to Save the World is particularly noteworthy since Cravens was vociferously against nuclear power before she educated herself and found herself in favor of it; it's a remarkable example of how someone can change their mind in the face of evidence.

            Another informal, breezy and excellent treatment is Scott Heaberlin's A Case for Nuclear-Generated Electricity: (Or Why I Think Nuclear Power Is Cool and Why It Is Important That You Think So Too).

            Problem is, folks never read a book unless they want to. I learnt that after giving up on telling friends & family about brilliant books to no avail!

            2. Bad psychological connections: There are two bad connections in the minds of many liberals, both of which are rather unjustified and contribute to their dislike of nuclear power. One is the connection between nuclear power and nuclear weapons.

            Knowing the basics about how different weapons are from reactors can contribute to mitigating this misunderstanding; for instance it's been known for years that contrary to popular belief, reactors can't blow up like a bomb.

            Another flawed connection is between environmentalism and the boycott of nuclear power. Unfortunately die-hard environmentalists are mainly responsible for reinforcing this connection. Their decades-long opposition to nuclear energy started with some reasonable premises, but then mainly descended into irrational, uninformed and exaggerated polemic.

            Well, #2 conflates fear with distrust of scientists, so his framing is poor. His #3 is nuclear waste, which he fronts with a combination of evasion, minimisation & wishful thinking. 4. Damn them Republicans is guilt by association; then 5. Fear of the unknown. It's as if he's complaining about human nature. A reasonable effort at diagnosis but not good enough.

            https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/the-curious-wavefunction/top-5-reasons-why-intelligent-liberals-dont-like-nuclear-energy/#

            • RedLogix 7.1.2.1.1.1
              22 December 2021 at 2:32 pm

              His #3 is nuclear waste, which he fronts with a combination of evasion, minimisation & wishful thinking.

              Not quite sure what you mean by this. The reality is that the 'waste' from the existing fleet of PWR reactors is actually an exceptionally valuable fuel. A number of Gen 4 designs explicitly target this fuel source:

              If we reprocessed the waste from nuclear reactors on a large scale, much of it would become much more benign and could be handled much more safely in low volumes.

              This is precisely what is planned and is absolutely achievable. The main barrier to progressing this using conventional reprocessing was always the reasonable fear of isolating weapons grade materials and the resulting proliferation. If however the fuel is re-used in the correct type of reactor, this simply does not happen, the plutonium is 'burned up' and transformed into fission products that have no weapons use whatsoever – and have relatively shorter half-lives that make storage a lot more feasible.

              In reality the 'waste' problem from nuclear is both contained and at very low volumes compared to every other energy generation method we know of. Even solar and wind have their own serious 'end of life' waste problems that are rarely discussed.

              An interesting link all the same – thanks.

              • Dennis Frank …
                22 December 2021 at 3:32 pm

                If smiley

                A famous historical foreign policy response. Didn't work for the Spartan rulers tho. Philip II of Macedon (Alexander the Great's dad) called their bluff & conquered them.

                The tech you mentioned has been eagerly awaited by me for most of my adult life! Are they really close to achieving the goal? I'm sceptical. Have always like the theory, said so when we last discussed it, but still no evidence they have broken the tech barrier. Same for fusion tech.

                • RedLogix …
                  22 December 2021 at 4:31 pm

                  but still no evidence they have broken the tech barrier.

                  Depends on what you mean by 'barrier'. For all the Gen 4 designs we know the nuclear physics works. This includes the entire gamut of types, not just the MSR's I've taken a keen interest in. This is not in question.

                  The next level of challenge is optimising the design to achieve the desired sweet spot between cost, operability, maintainability, passive safety and life cycle. And all the designers active in this field at the moment have a different target in mind. Included in this work is a whole range of tasks necessary to fully qualify the materials and nucleonics in exquisite detail. I follow this work closely and exciting progress is being made all the time. For instance – don't watch this – only a total geek could love it.

                  The next major hurdle has been regulatory; all the major regulators have until quite recently written everything around the safety profile of the existing PWR fleet, which is not fit for purpose with these new generation designs. Until there was the prospect of any new design ever being approved, private equity funding was always going to be limited. Fortunately this aspect is rapidly changing, with fresh new people taking a much more proactive position toward Gen 4. The Canadian regulator is well ahead of the pack, and the Indonesians are forging ahead to build their capacity as well.

                  The final category of challenge is establishing the necessary equipment and materials supply chains that will enable these new designs to go from pilot plants to the mass scale manufacturing necessary to make a real world difference. In technical principle this is the easiest, but in practice it's also the most frustratingly slow aspect to resolve.

                  But in summary – there is no fundamental technical 'barrier' that's preventing progress.

                  • Dennis Frank …
                    22 December 2021 at 5:38 pm

                    Yeah but that's just the physics & engineering view. I went & scanned the Gen 4 wiki & developers are all over the place.

                    To me, the tech barrier most relevant to public/political acceptability features two design criteria: fail-safe & waste consumption. Couldn't see evidence that the industry has figured this out yet!

                    Plus there's the bit about fast reactors not coming on-stream until 2040. I get that you're keen on progress being made but I can't see any basis for sharing the enthusiasm. Seems to me that allowing geeks to make all the running isn't all that smart. Geeks don't do marketing, nor do they do govt liaison. Any market viability will depend on regulatory satisfaction in both design & working model.

                    • RedLogix …
                      22 December 2021 at 11:10 pm

                      To me, the tech barrier most relevant to public/political acceptability features two design criteria: fail-safe & waste consumption. Couldn't see evidence that the industry has figured this out yet!

                      Passive 'walk away' safety is baked into many of the Gen 4 designs, especially the MSR's. I'm not sure how to answer this question because I don't understand the criteria you are using, but the idea that they 'haven't figured it out' simply doesn't align with anything I'm seeing.

                      Plus there's the bit about fast reactors not coming on-stream until 2040.

                      The thinking at present is that these fast waste burners are not a high priority, there is no need to rush them into operation. It's more logical to get simpler designs running now to deal with the CO2 issue now, and deal with the waste streams later.

                      the Gen 4 wiki & developers are all over the place.

                      Yes there are a variety of Gen 4 approaches being taken, and this is because each group has a particular niche or market they are aiming for. In the long run it's expected there will evolve a range of designs all complementing each other in specific roles.

        • RedLogix 7.1.2.2
          22 December 2021 at 1:47 pm

          And this story really hit's it out of the park as far as I'm concerned:

          In late 2019, Lights was interviewed by the BBC’s Andrew Neil, renowned for his relentless and forensic interview technique which disallows avoidance, spin and diversion.

          After confronting Lights with the lack of scientific evidence for the ER movement’s apocalyptic claims of climate change killing billions in 20 years, Neil asked what would be required to achieve its demand for zero net emissions by 2025. Did she agree it would require confiscation of petrol cars, state rationing of meat and limiting families to one flight every five years?

          Lights responded she wasn’t there to give solutions. Does aviation need to come to an end? A visibly uncomfortable Lights said, “Possibly”. All gas heating and cooking to go in six years? After an awkward pause, Lights simply said if that humans could put a man on the moon, we could tackle this.

          That may have been the end of it. But it turns out Lights isn’t like other activists. She’s wasn’t out to draw attention to herself by gluing herself to a bus. She actually wants real change. And when confronted with the logical consequences of her movement’s demands, she realised it wouldn’t achieve any change at all because it had no workable solutions.

          This is intellectual honesty – it's the best we can hope for from anyone. We are all different, and I'm not here to make everyone think just like me. But we can all ruthlessly challenge our assumptions.

          • Robert Guyton 7.1.2.2.1
            22 December 2021 at 2:14 pm

            "And when confronted with the logical consequences of her movement’s demands, she realised it wouldn’t achieve any change at all because it had no workable solutions."

            She knew of no workable solutions.

            "But it turns out Lights isn’t like other activists."

            So, not an activist then?

            "She’s wasn’t out to draw attention to herself by gluing herself to a bus. She actually wants real change."

            Activists don't want real change?

            Sweeping, poorly thought-through statements in this article, RedLogix.

            • RedLogix 7.1.2.2.1.1
              22 December 2021 at 2:51 pm

              "Workable" in my book means something that can be achieved in the world we live in, with the people we live with, in the timeframe we have available.

              As much as I admire the work you do Robert, it's not a whole solution. As with my argument on COVID, we need all the tools in the kit to get out of this mess.

              • Robert Guyton …
                22 December 2021 at 5:23 pm

                Some tools should be locked forever, in the kit, RedLogix.

                Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

          • Pat 7.1.2.2.2
            22 December 2021 at 8:27 pm

            Intellectual honesty?……was life unbearable in 1965?

            Energy consumption per capita has almost doubled since then (not to mention the total population has also doubled)

      • Dennis Frank 7.2.1
        22 December 2021 at 1:14 pm

        poor planning

        So that army of Eurocrats created in Brussels spent most of their time trying to control the Brits – instead of planning for power supply?

        Goodness me, as my grandmother used to say. Did nobody realise there could be a supply problem? Or did they get dollar signs in their eyes, copying each other in a frantic effort to mine bitcoins, thereby pulling excessive power out of the system?

        Forbes points to an "unfortunate confluence of factors":

        Resurgent energy demand post-Covid, extreme weather events (unprecedented heatwaves and prolonged winters), supply chain disruptions, and poor regional and global stockpiling have all contributed to Europe’s current crisis.

        Russia’s supremo Vladimir Putin may have a reason to pop a champagne bottle in view of the EU’s sanctions on the Kremlin. He says that Europe had created a self-inflicted wound. He may be right.

        The Qatari Energy Minister, Saad Al-Kaabi stated, “we have huge demand from all our customers and unfortunately, we can’t cater for everyone.” Qatar prefers East Asian customers who pay a premium. The EU is no longer the top market.

        China has doubled their LNG imports over the last year (another reason Europe finds itself with lower than normal supplies). More than 20 provinces have enacted rationing to deal with the worsening situation. “Get energy supplies at any price”, ordered the ruling Politburo, highlighting the giant economy’s dependence on imported coal and gas.

        A while ago, CEO of Gazprom Alexei Miller, stated in my presence that his company is “half a business, and half a state policy arm.” Since then the shift is probably to 40-60 in favor of the state. European leaders were quick to claim that Russia is now weaponizing the gas markets to gain approval of the Nord Stream 2. Currently, Gazprom sends piped natural gas through Ukraine. A new pipeline would circumvent the embattled country.

        The energy crisis unfolding in Europe has many drivers, but EU green policy hubris, and Russian hard-nosed energy poker are the key. The main lesson is: one cannot will energy transformation into reality without building ample, reliable and economically viable baseline generation capacity.

        https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2021/10/14/europes-self-inflicted-energy-crisis/?sh=5ee386ac2af3

  8. Anker 8
    22 December 2021 at 12:45 pm
    • Covid 19 in the Hutt Valley. Someone who was supposed to be self isolating. This is what selfishness looks like
  9. tc 9
    22 December 2021 at 1:52 pm

    Simon power as the new tvnz CEO. So we go from a travel agent to a lawyer banker….were there no painters and Dockers available ?

  10. roblogic 10
    22 December 2021 at 4:08 pm

    Just read Cam Slater’s autobiographical piece on his dirty little blog. Starts off interesting then descends into irrational hatred and demonisation of the PM. Methinks the primary architect of Dirty Politics needs to take a look in the mirror. What a scumbag

    He’s lining up with Damien De Ment and the other hateful rabble inspired by Steve Bannon who believe all sorts of gross things about Democrats. This is dangerous delusional thinking and I hope the security services are aware of it.

    Yuck, I feel gross now

    • weston 10.1
      22 December 2021 at 6:23 pm

      Republicans an Democrats are just two halves of the same backside arnt they Roblogic ?

      Whats to like about Democrats ??

      • observer 10.1.1
        22 December 2021 at 6:28 pm

        You've missed the point by a mile, there.

      • roblogic 10.1.2
        22 December 2021 at 7:55 pm

        I am no great fan of Democrats, but neither do I feel the need to engage in Q-Anon conpiracy bullshit and claim that they are baby eating paedophile lizards in league with Satan. That kind of batshit insanity is what drove the Jan 6 coup attempt in the USA, and it is a stain upon the church and a festering virus that breeds in dark corners of social media. These people dog whistle, and sometimes outright endorse, despicable acts of violence; with serves their (not very secret) aims of anarchy and fascism.

    • observer 10.2
      22 December 2021 at 6:36 pm

      It is pure hatred. Not policy, not debate, not "holding to account". Just a sad man spewing poison.

      I'm certainly not going to link to Slater's obnoxious blog but here's a tweet (not supporting him) that gives a flavour of his toxic tirade …

      https://twitter.com/egorub/status/1471692677703880711

      • Blazer 10.2.1
        22 December 2021 at 8:38 pm

        He is quite irrelevant these days.

        He has managed to become everything he supposedly despises…

        'ratbag ..who doesn't pay his debts'

        'should hand in his mancard'=pathetic,girls blouse attempt at FFL.

        Always begging for money=bludger.

      • roblogic 10.2.2
        23 December 2021 at 7:53 pm

        Good link, ta. Agree it's bitter and dark stuff. Every sane person who has met Jacinda says she is great.

        Cool hashtag trending today: #ChurArdern

    • millsy 10.3
      23 December 2021 at 9:32 pm

      Slater has always been like that. When that lady died after she got her power cut off, he took an alarming level of pleasure in it. Almost sexual in nature.