What’s the holdup?

82 comments on “What’s the holdup? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. BM 1

   1 July 2013 at 2:24 pm

   Is this the youth wing of the green party?
   Just to add 100% no fossil fuels is a silly and unobtainable goal.
   • Draco T Bastard 1.1

     1 July 2013 at 3:33 pm

     Just to add 100% no fossil fuels is a silly and unobtainable goal.

     Actually, it’s a necessary goal especially for NZ as we won’t have access to fossil fuels in a few years time.
   • insider 1.2

     1 July 2013 at 3:39 pm

     Irony zero for the guy who turned up on. Natrad recently and proclaimed the evils of fossil fuels before blithely telling about his soon trip to Asia just for a look around, before he jets off to Oxford.
     • One Anonymous Knucklehead 1.2.1

       1 July 2013 at 3:41 pm

       So buying a plane ticket on a scheduled flight increases carbon emissions? Or are you just running your mouth again?
       • insider 1.2.1.1

         1 July 2013 at 3:51 pm

         Schedules reflect demand. Buying a ticket adds to that. Or is he going on one of those magic planes that shuttle about for no reason…
         • andyS 1.2.1.1.1

           1 July 2013 at 9:18 pm

           I thought One Anon might be on drugs when she started making random threats against me, but this last comment nails it for me.
           • weka 1.2.1.1.1.1

             1 July 2013 at 9:28 pm

             What?
             • andyS …

               1 July 2013 at 9:41 pm

               Oh you use have missed the discussion last week when One anon started posting my personal details on this blog, making claims that I was a liar, etc, and that she or he was going to smear my name far and wide, and bring my family into it.

               It is the kind of behavior I have come to expect, ,but when I hear comments like getting on a scheduled flight is cool because it was going to fly anyway, I realise that I am dealing with a weapons grade tosser, so I am probably better off having a quiet laugh and getting on with my life
               • weka …

                 1 July 2013 at 9:50 pm

                 Except you had to come here and use this space for your personal agenda to get back at OAK. Which makes you not much better than them.
                 • andyS …

                   2 July 2013 at 8:24 am

                   How else do you suggest I get back at OAK?

                   How do I respond to an anonymous bully? Of course, OAK can contact me directly, using the contact details he/she has published here and elsewhere against my wishes and against comment policy.

                   I did offer this option but OAK decided that this platform was the best place to “out” me, for some unspecified crimes against humanity
                   • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                     2 July 2013 at 8:39 am

                     Nope. In fact, all I did was use information that you yourself had publicised.

                     If it was against comment policy my comments would have been moderated – as indeed they were until I pointed out that you had previously revealed your identity.

                     As for “unspecified crimes”, I’ve made it crystal clear what I object to about your behaviour.

                     Still, it’s nice to see you all querulous and bleating. Cry, baby.
                   • Bob …

                     3 July 2013 at 9:15 am

                     And this has come from a person (OAK) that just stated on another thread “Spying is a military operation. Conducting military operations against civilians is a war crime.” yet when it comes to tracking down personal information on an anonymous poster here they class you as a ‘cry baby’.
                     The hypocrasy is unbelievable (yet not unexpected).
                   • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                     3 July 2013 at 9:21 am

                     “Tracking down”?

                     😆 Nothing so complex: I simply remembered his name, because he’d told us what it is.

                     PS: learn to spell hypocrisy.
                   • andyS …

                     3 July 2013 at 9:25 am

                     I didn’t tell you OAK.

                     However, you seem to get some kind of perverse pleasure at making veiled threats against me and my family.

                     [lprent: I just wasted a a number of minutes searching for some “veiled threats against me and my family”. There aren’t any as far as I can see (put a link in to a comment on this site if you disagree and explain why in terms of the policy).

                     What I have seen is that he has been been describing you in an unveiled fashion as being quite thick in his opinion (an opinion that I personally share). However regardless of anyone’s personal opinions on that, it is covered by “robust debate” part of policy.

                     Don’t waste my time making bullshit claims about other peoples behaviour that I have to check under the policy. Eventually I get pissed off wasting time and get rid of the problem – the person making the demands on the moderator’s time. This is also part of the policy.

                     I have pointed out previously that you need to read the policy. I’ll reiterate that for the last time. ]
                   • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                     3 July 2013 at 9:32 am

                     Well then call me and we’ll have a little chat. – oh I see you’ve deleted your claim to know me. Come on sweety what are you afraid of?

                     And yes, Andy, you told everyone who you are. I’m not going to link to the comment (again) because you’re obviously having problems with it, but you let the genie out of the bottle.

                     I have not threatened you with anything other than publicity for your relentless mendacity. I have not threatened your family at all. I have merely noted that your relentless mendacity drags their name through the mud as it does yours.
                   • andyS …

                     3 July 2013 at 9:39 am

                     I have not threatened you with anything other than publicity for your relentless mendacity. I have not threatened your family at all. I have merely noted that your relentless mendacity drags their name through the mud as it does yours

                     You haven’t actually specified any “mendacity” at all. All you have done is make vague comments about me and then stated that you will smear my name “far and wide”

                     Not much so far is there?

                     You seem to spend a lot of time on this blog. Do you have a job? Or are you some waster you sits in some bedsit randomly attacking people on the internet?
                   • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                     3 July 2013 at 9:41 am

                     Are you stupid or something? The list of your lies is just a few comments further down the page.
                   • andyS …

                     3 July 2013 at 1:29 pm

                     @lprent, the commenter known as “One Anonymous Knucklehead” has used my full name here, against my wishes and against moderation policy

                     OAK has also claimed that he/she will smear my name “far and wide”.

                     OAK has provided no evidence whatsoever for any of these accusations against me. He/she has provides a list of my comments and a list of “Skeptical Science” arguments, yet provided no basis for the accusations of linkage

                     I am sorry if this is wasting moderators time, but as a self-employed person I feel that I need to defend my reputation against anonymous thugs like OAK
                   • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                     3 July 2013 at 1:49 pm

                     Are you such an idiot you think people can’t read your lies for themselves? Do I have to rub your face in them? Okay:

                     Lies about rare earth minerals ring a bell? How about lies about Trenberth? Lies about Marcott and Mann? Lies about “how climate science works”. Those are just for starters.

                     It adds up to a pattern of behaviour, much like your claims of “associates” on your website. You’re an unethical piece of trash.
                   • andyS …

                     3 July 2013 at 2:04 pm

                     It adds up to a pattern of behaviour, much like your claims of “associates” on your website. You’re an unethical piece of trash.

                     You really are quite a nasty piece of work OAK. Sure I have “associates” I work with other people. Actually I do some real work, unlike anonymous skinheads like you who hover around blogs like this all day. I am very reluctant to post any further details on my personal website when thugs like you are prepared to contact them with the presumed aim of putting me out of business.

                     My comment about “rare earths” was quite accurate. I was asked about neodymium. I incorrectly stated that all the world’s neodymium was produced in China, when the correct answer is 97%

                     If you have issues around Marcott et al, I am sure I can discuss them too.

                     However, I don’t intend to waste anymore of my time engaging with anonymous skinheads on blogs whose only interest is in thuggish intolerance
                   • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                     3 July 2013 at 2:14 pm

                     Real work? Obviously this invoice is for “unreal” work or something 😀

                     Notwithstanding your trash weasel words about Marcott, there are no “issues” that you are qualified to judge, are there?

                     As for me publicising your behaviour, if you’ve been honest you’ve got nothing to fear. What are you so afraid of?
               • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                 2 July 2013 at 7:30 am

                 You brought your own family into it when you chose to put your full name to your habitual lies.
                 • andyS …

                   3 July 2013 at 9:46 am

                   I never “chose” to put my full name to anything. Furthermore, you have failed to mention any “lies”
                   • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                     3 July 2013 at 9:56 am

                     Andy, you are on the “Internet”. When you see a word in a different colour on the “Internet”, you can “click” (press your left mouse button while “hovering” over it) on it and be taken to another “Internet” web site. Like this:

                     The list. Compare and contrast the list with a simple search for comments by AndyS.
           • One Anonymous Knucklehead 1.2.1.1.1.2

             2 July 2013 at 7:27 am

             “random threats”? 😆

             Using someone’s full name is a threat. Yes sirree.
             • andyS …

               2 July 2013 at 8:31 am

               Perhaps you would like to provide me with your full name, and list all these so-called “lies”

               Then we can have a nice civilised “chat” in private somewhere
               • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                 2 July 2013 at 8:44 am

                 Oh, the list.

                 I note that your desire to meet could be regarded as a threat. Are you having violent fantasies?
     • Bill 1.2.2

       1 July 2013 at 3:54 pm

       Yup. Think I’ve heard that same guy proclaim the same thing at a public meeting – about how he’d sacrificed his life choices but was off to Oxford in pursuit his life choices. Makes me suspect Gen Zero is comprised of more than a few well meaning privileged types who want ‘everyone’ and ‘everything’ to change but to leave them and their lifestyles intact
       • weka 1.2.2.1

         1 July 2013 at 5:45 pm

         Possibly, but their website is impressive, in the sense of presenting the right things to middle NZ to motivate them.
     • weka 1.2.3

       1 July 2013 at 5:10 pm

       “Irony zero for the guy who turned up on. Natrad recently”

       Was he from the Generation Zero team?
       • insider 1.2.3.1

         2 July 2013 at 9:01 am

         It was a guy called Louis chambers who apparently was a founder. Kim hill did the interview
2. Brett Dale 2

   1 July 2013 at 2:29 pm

   So do these people have phd’s in engineering and the such? or is it just the youth wing of the green party, telling people what they should and shouldnt do, without any data or research?
   • One Anonymous Knucklehead 2.1

     1 July 2013 at 2:34 pm

     “…without any data or research”.

     Oh really, is that what it’s based on? Or is that just your idiocy and bias talking? I’m picking idiocy and bias.
   • fender 2.2

     1 July 2013 at 2:36 pm

     Well since you are using it, do you have an English doctorate?
     • One Anonymous Knucklehead 2.2.1

       1 July 2013 at 2:45 pm

       You’ve got it wrong, Fender: you only need a doctorate to hold opinions that Brett disagrees with.
       • fender 2.2.1.1

         1 July 2013 at 2:53 pm

         LOL….silly me!
   • Ben Clark 2.3

     1 July 2013 at 2:42 pm

     You could always look for yourself.

     They appear largely university educated with a few Science & Engineering and Law degrees .
     Does that satisfy?
   • karol 2.4

     1 July 2013 at 2:42 pm

     If you follow the link to the Generation Zero website you can see they are a sizeable young team with diverse qualifications and experiences. Including, in the strategy team, who conduct research, analysis and consultation necessary to inform our organisation’s strategic direction.:

     Jimmy Green
     Jimmy studied engineering at the University of Canterbury with ambitions to change our world’s technology. Now he uses technology to help bring people ambition to tackle the world’s biggest problem. In between engineering at Wellington City Council, Jimmy has been working with Generation Zero since the early days.

     On the Direction setting team:

     Paul Young: Solutions and Strategy Researcher […]
     finishing his MSc in physics, studying ocean wave power.
     […]

     Kirk Serpes
     Kirk is a mechanical engineer and has worked in the electricity industry for over three years, mostly on geothermal energy.

     Young, still gaining qualifications and experience, innovative ideas, fresh thinking, and focused on the very important issue.
     • weka 2.4.1

       1 July 2013 at 3:02 pm

       Not just a bunch of hippies then 🙂

       Good on them. The oldies couldn’t get it together, maybe this crew can.
3. Lanthanide 3

   1 July 2013 at 2:30 pm

   “Right now, we have the opportunity to lead the way to a safe climate future. The evidence shows it’s 100% possible to create a thriving New Zealand beyond fossil fuels. So what’s the holdup?”

   Yes, that’s true. Just depends what quality of life you’re willing to put up with. Not many would actually want to live in such a future.
   • BM 3.1

     1 July 2013 at 2:35 pm

     Yeah, good luck trying to get everyone especially young people to give up their cars and take the bus.
     You’ve got to be a bit more realistic.
     • One Anonymous Knucklehead 3.1.1

       1 July 2013 at 2:37 pm

       😆 Realism 😆

       Like when Petrol goes over $3 per litre? How about $6/l?
       • weka 3.1.1.1

         1 July 2013 at 2:44 pm

         Realism.

         Like when you have to cue up to buy food. And you still have to carry it on the walk home.
         • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.1.1

           1 July 2013 at 3:45 pm

           Why would we be queuing? And why would we be carrying it home when it will be delivered?
           • weka 3.1.1.1.1.1

             1 July 2013 at 4:01 pm

             Draco, my response was predicated* on us carrying on BAU until we have no choice, not on making a sensible transition. If we carry on BAU we will likely have food and fuel shortages.

             *And the reason I was doing this was because people like BM think there is a choice of futures. Apparently the logic goes, people don’t want to change therefore AGW doesn’t exist. We can carry on with BAU, so why would we want to try and mitigate AGW?
             • Draco T Bastard …

               1 July 2013 at 4:05 pm

               Ah, fair enough.
       • BM 3.1.1.2

         1 July 2013 at 3:05 pm

         If it happens, it happens.
         People will deal with it then, I remember reading peakoil.com and every one shrieking the end is nigh and we’re all doomed when oil went past $45.00 a barrel.
         Makes me laugh when you think back to what was said, the thing I have learnt though, is that humans are incredibly adaptive and resilient which is why we’re still top dogs.

         Even if everything does turn to shit, I’ll just morph into Humongous “Warrior of the waste land”, so no worries here.
         • One Anonymous Knucklehead 3.1.1.2.1

           1 July 2013 at 3:10 pm

           If that’s the only future you can imagine, you have a shit imagination.
         • Bill 3.1.1.2.2

           1 July 2013 at 3:24 pm

           ‘Adapt’, my arse, BM!

           How do we ‘adapt’ to (for example) heatwaves that will deliver temps in the high 40’s over quite long periods of time and knock out infrastructure that wee conveniences like air conditioning run on? Or what about ‘adapting’ to massively reduced crop yields due to drought….or flooding…or a combination of both?

           There is a world of difference between adapting to conditions that are within the confines of present climatic parameters (with the aid of our technological ‘prowess’) and adapting to conditions that human biology has never experienced and so isn’t evolved to deal with and that is also beyond the engineering tolerances of much of our technology/infrastructure.
         • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.2.3

           1 July 2013 at 3:47 pm

           If it happens, it happens.

           Oh, it will happen, no doubt about that.

           People will deal with it then

           Easier and cheaper to deal with it now.
         • Macro_adder 3.1.1.2.4

           1 July 2013 at 7:34 pm

           “people will deal with it then”

           You have NO IDEA!!

           Far too late to be dealing with AGW in 10 or 20 or 30 years time mate! The Earth will continue to heat for years after we cease burning fossil fuels. In fact the time to deal with the problem was 20+ years ago in 1991 (you remember the Kyoto Protocol to which NZ was one of the first signatories via a NATIONAL MP Simon Upton?) That was the first chance and perhaps our only real chance to actually come to grips with weaning the Western World off fossil fuels and combating dangerous Global Warning. The prognosis for the future is a world at least 2 degrees C warmer and there ain’t nothing going to stop it. The consequences of that will impinge on the young people of today – they are the ones who will bear the brunt of your (and the people like you) greed. Unfortunately, the States and Australia, who have only now come to the party, turned there backs and stuffed it up. In the meantime under the idiocy of our present twits NZ has left the party and we are now at the back of the pack.
           • weka 3.1.1.2.4.1

             1 July 2013 at 9:03 pm

             Don’t worry, BM is just going to go all Mad Max when tshtf. Makes sense, he’ll probably prefer the world that way.
         • Shenaz 3.1.1.2.5

           1 July 2013 at 11:56 pm

           RAHHHH Fuck wit!!! adapting is what you’re supposed to do NOW!!!! like here comes a catastrophe let’s adapt the fuck out of the way
     • Draco T Bastard 3.1.2

       1 July 2013 at 3:43 pm

       I suspect you’ll find that more and more young people are taking the bus and just not getting cars.
4. Ben Clark 4

   1 July 2013 at 2:33 pm

   If they are, they hide it very well.

   When I was standing in the North Shore in 2011, they were trying to interview every major party candidate to ge their stance on climate change. Having trouble getting a lot of National Party ones to give them time, but a very worthy effort.

   They’re non-party political.

   (edit: reply to BM@1, but somehow didn’t…)
   • weka 4.1

     1 July 2013 at 2:46 pm

     I wouldn’t worry, it suits BM’s agenda to make out that the only people who care about climate change are the GP.
5. Brett Dale 5

   1 July 2013 at 3:32 pm

   If your going around the country speaking to people, please be factually correct.

   Zero emissions? Tha anit happening.
   • One Anonymous Knucklehead 5.1

     1 July 2013 at 3:36 pm

     That’s a nice strawman sweety. Did you make it yourself?
     • Brett Dale 5.1.1

       1 July 2013 at 3:49 pm

       sweety, Im flattered.

       If they want zero emissions, they’re aren’t cemented in reality.

       Its not going to happen, people need to be real.
       • Bill 5.1.1.1

         1 July 2013 at 3:57 pm

         Zero emissions can never happen. But zero emissions from fuel use can. And since most of the ‘extra’ carbon is coming from fossil fuels being burned as fuel….
       • One Anonymous Knucklehead 5.1.1.2

         1 July 2013 at 4:00 pm

         @Brett: then it’s a good thing only fuckwits claim that’s the goal.
         • Brett Dale 5.1.1.2.1

           1 July 2013 at 4:08 pm

           Well the greens have their fair share of those.
           • One Anonymous Knucklehead 5.1.1.2.1.1

             1 July 2013 at 4:10 pm

             Not just the Greens, Brett: in fact you were claiming it yourself only two comments ago.
             • Brett Dale …

               1 July 2013 at 4:15 pm

               I didnt claim that was their only goal, but it thats one of them, they’re not cemented in reality.
               • Bill …

                 1 July 2013 at 4:43 pm

                 I didnt claim that was their only goal,..

                 It isn’t a goal of theirs. You get that? Not one of their goals. Not their only goal. Not one of their goals.

                 Now please shut the fuck up and go away until you have something relevant to say.

                 Cheers.
                 • Brett Dale …

                   1 July 2013 at 4:57 pm

                   zero fossil fuels then,

                   shut the fuck up????

                   how old are you billy? 12?
                   • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                     1 July 2013 at 5:19 pm

                     So, your wizened little notion is that “zero fossil fuels” “isn’t an option”?

                     Do you understand the concept of a finite resource? Stupid question: we already established that you’re a fuckwit.
6. Peter 6

   1 July 2013 at 5:29 pm

   No civilisation has ever transitioned from being R-selected to K-selected in one giant leap, we simply don’t know what combination of technologies and cultures are needed to do it. And by doing “it”, I mean powering all our systems on about 20% of the energy we have available today. I don’t think we can ever know, all we can do is keep knowledge alive for future generations.
   • weka 6.1

     1 July 2013 at 5:32 pm

     R-selected? K-selected?
     • Peter 6.1.1

       2 July 2013 at 9:10 am

       Sorry, I’m running on John Michael Greer’s theory here of ecological seres (“stages”) in human societies. Our current society could be described as R-selected, which maximises production, reproduction and expansion over long term stability. A K-selected society could conceivably maintain relatively high technology on a renewable resource base, but it would have to limit access to and accumulation of wealth.

       Think of the difference between weeds (R-selected) and a climax community/mature forest (K-selected), and you’ll see the difference.

       Given the right circumstances, a K-selected society could evolve.

       However, the transition is long, bumpy, and painful, and we’ll probably never live to see it. It might be technically feasible to implement it tomorrow (and it is), the issues are political, cultural and economic, because after all, if we don’t have that understanding, then there is no possible way that we can manage such a society.

       Hence, it has to evolve over generations, and we have to supply it with knowledge.
   • Draco T Bastard 6.2

     1 July 2013 at 5:44 pm

     I mean powering all our systems on about 20% of the energy we have available today.

     I believe that if NZ stopped all use of fossil fuels today we’d drop to a little under 50% of the energy we use. Most of the drop would be the cars off the road.

     …we simply don’t know what combination of technologies and cultures are needed to do it.

     We can take an educated guess – electric rail, trolley buses, trucks and tractors, powered through hydro/wind/solar generation and sailing ships would probably do it. Throw in recycling to minimize excess use of resources and sourcing of fertilizers from waste treatment plants and we shouldn’t have too much of a problem.

     The needed cultural change would be to a no growth economy (i.e, an economy that’s not getting any bigger, development would still be a go).
     • weka 6.2.1

       1 July 2013 at 6:57 pm

       One of the Gen Zero links is to research on biofuel from pine forestry on what is otherwise marginal, sloping farmland. I haven’t had a good look yet, and I’m sure there are better species than pine that could be used, but interesting.
       • insider 6.2.1.1

         2 July 2013 at 9:37 am

         Scion have actually been looking at this.it’s not a new idea. Big problem is waste is scattered and low in energy. The economics get unsupportable pretty quickly.
         • weka 6.2.1.1.1

           2 July 2013 at 10:09 am

           I think their link is to Scion’s research. What do you mean by waste is scattered?

           “The economics get unsupportable pretty quickly.”

           That will change once all the cheap oil is gone. Might change sooner too, when people start thinking outside the box…

           Using the wilding pine trees which infest the Central Lakes district as an energy source to heat commercial buildings is being studied by both councils in partnership with two government agencies.

           http://www.odt.co.nz/news/queenstown-lakes/239876/study-bio-fuel-use
           • insider 6.2.1.1.1.1

             2 July 2013 at 11:38 am

             Sorry I hadn’t followed the link. If you are using tree trimmings as a fuel source it is not worth transporting them any distance so on site refining is the best option in support of the logging operation. That’s slow and expensive and problematic because most major fuel use on site will be for diesel not ethanol. I’m not sure logging for ethanol is really viable either compared to other potential ethanol source crops.
     • Peter 6.2.2

       2 July 2013 at 9:18 am

       That’s technologies, not cultures. The tech is the easy bit, it’s the long term culture to sustain and maintain the tech that’s the hard bit, plus the massive reality shift to realising that we cannot keep growing. Hence why I don’t think we’ll ever see that society in our lifetime.
   • Bill 6.3

     1 July 2013 at 5:56 pm

     …all we can do is keep knowledge alive for future generations.

     I sometimes wonder about this. I’m fairly confident that most of our grandparents had a better and more rounded knowledge base than most of us have today. I guess there are a few reasons for that, not least of which is the evolution of highly specialised technologies and, with that, specialised knowledge.

     There’s also the unservicability of too much of the stuff we produce, meaning there is no incentive or opportunity to learn scalable or cross referencing shit from doing shit. And then of the stuff that’s still open to exploration and learning, we throw in the hurdle of forbidding people having anything to do with it – ie, work done without the required certificated who-ever risks the loss of insurance cover or what not.

     I dunno – when I think of the contemporary western situation, my mind conjures up koala bears who have more or less evolved perfectly with regards their niche environment. But who are about to lose their eucalypts and so…about to experience what it’s like to be looking back from the dead end of over specialisation.
     • Peter 6.3.1

       2 July 2013 at 2:56 pm

       That’s precisely the problem, we believe that we have huge stores of knowledge, but most of it is highly specialised and non-applicable to the future we are facing. Our grandparents did indeed know far more.

       Knowledge of this type tends to be more useful as living practical skills too, rather than a book on the shelf, or a degrading CD in a vault…

       So yes, it’s a huge and largely unrecognised problem. Can’t I just look up Google 🙂
7. Brett Dale 7

   1 July 2013 at 5:32 pm

   Knucklehead:

   Lovely, name calling, your the coolest kid in the 6th grade.
   • One Anonymous Knucklehead 7.1

     2 July 2013 at 7:43 am

     Finite resource, strawboy.
8. Tom Barker 8

   1 July 2013 at 6:36 pm

   Where the hell is “Hamiltron”?
   • felix 8.1

     3 July 2013 at 9:42 am

     There’s a map here if that helps.

     It’s the city of the future.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS