Public Address | System (Home)

Posted at 3:15PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Maybe he should have Lisa Lewis interview Peter Dunne then.

On 2nd thoughts, I still wouldn't be able to watch him.

Posted at 3:23PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

A quick look at some 6pm news stories from the last couple of days: A great story last night (watch it here if you haven't already)) on a couple of small-town dairies happily selling vital ingredients for making P – and in at least one case, doing so knowingly

There are a few comments re: the TVNZ's "p-ingredient-shock-expose" over in this thread

Posted at 3:30PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

OMG, I not only cringed but flinched when I saw Mr Driver interviewing Henry Rollins the other night. Especially after listening to a particularly good interview with him (Rollins) on National Radio within the same week. Bad sound, bad lighting, bad posture and just bad! Shame on you Oliver, you could at least conduct your interviews somewhere where the sound doesn't come across like you're sitting in a massive shipping container. Either that or fire your sound engineers, they're doing a crap job!

Posted at 3:44PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

There are a few comments re: the TVNZ's "p-ingredient-shock-expose" over in this thread

Yeah, I've just seen that and commented there. I disagree with a few of the punters who are trying to play it down. I think it was a bloody good sting - the dairy owner who clearly knew what was going on, what he was providing, and for what purpose.

I wouldn't be surprised if the guy is run out of town.

Posted at 3:50PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Just last week I was in a conversation with a young woman who complained that New Zealand television news was rubbish because it was full of cutesy animal stories.

Now, I've watched a lot of television news over the past four years (for professional reasons, y'know), I totally agree with Damian - there's not actually a lot of cutesy animal stories out there.

And if there are, they tend to be slotted in the final slot of the bulletin, where things are winding down and other lighter news goes.

Maybe the cutesy animal stories stand out because they're the ones that people remember and talk about at work the next day without fear of rarking up the crazy political guy.

Aaaaaaand the other thing with TV news is that a good news reader can't be more important than the news they're reading. They have to be almost a neutral background - no more thrilling than newsprint or HTML. A topless lady adds a distraction. We're not paying full attention to the important news item. We're looking at her tits.

Posted at 4:02PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

I'm of the understanding that Comalco receives some of the cheapest electricity in the world. I might be wrong, I might be right - can anyone can confirm this?

Posted at 4:15PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

every one I've talked to today about the possibility of Comalco shutting down today responded with something like "you know that might not be a bad thing "

I think we should call their bluff

Posted at 4:17PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Personally, otters are my favourite animals, ever. I'd happily watch Jin the otter stories all news hour. Otters really can come under anything - heath (vets), education (training), sports (otters doing tricks and whatnot). Otters otters otters!

Umm, sorry. Back on track.

As for what's actually shown on the news. I don't so much get annoyed as what they're covering, as how they're covering it. The live cross to the reporter annoys the hell out of me, and wastes time where they could actually be telling us something more useful.

And when they interview politicians and they fob us all off with useless spin, ignoring the question. I don't need to be shown that, I believe you that politicians do that. Just say "we put this question to the Minister, and s/he declined to answer". Do that ten times and they might start being more forthcoming when the public thinks they never answer anything :)

And I'd be much more interested in Campbell Live, or Close Up if they devoted the majority of their show to an issue each night. An in depth lead in story - 7 - 8 minutes, followed by ad break, followed by in depth interview with a person or panel, and then ad break, and then maybe minor story or whatnot to finish. Russell's show has a nice feel to it with that - actually starting to get its teeth into an issue rather than just feeling like a news story that wasn't edited down as much.

Posted at 5:03PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Just say "we put this question to the Minister, and s/he declined to answer". Do that ten times and they might start being more forthcoming when the public thinks they never answer anything :)

I think you maybe onto something there... genius. I think it would work especially well in an election year, no?

Posted at 5:35PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

I think you maybe onto something there... genius. I think it would work especially well in an election year, no?

We could even have someone dissect their evasion. "Rather than answer the question, the spokesperson brought up an irrelevant topic"

Posted at 5:41PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Warning - rant follows.

I'm one of those freaky people who think the whole planet needs saving, not just my own back yard.

...And if they end up going to China, well so be it. We should no more be trying to undercut China in environmental terms than we should offer cheaper labour.

It might surprise, but our industrial enviromental standards massively exceed China's and a coal burning power station in China will produce more carbon dioxide than a hydroelectric dam in the South Island. And China and the South Island are on the same planet as Auckland - I know I was really scared when I found that out.

If the smelter goes to China the planet (remember - the same planet Auckland is on) is that much more screwed.

Big manufacturing plants in the developed world are clean & efficient compared to those in the developing world. Big business especially like the Tiwai smelter (which uses the best possible method of producing Aluminium) are positively kind to the planet.

Consumers in the developed world are (on the other hand) polluting, fat, latte drinking, plasma screen buying slobs compared to them energy efficient consumers of the developing world. Choosing between a solar water heater and a plasma TV Jafas always get the HDTV for proper Sky watching. Insulation or a balcony, a balcony offers so much more. Or buy a bach, screw the fact that will mean running over capacity powerlines miles into the middle of nowhere, it'll be worth it to cruise out there for 2 days in "nature".

So what does the government promise to do - tax a world leading carbon efficient, hydro powered smelter at Tiwai and minimise the fuel costs for Aucklanders whilst building more roads. Nimbyistic, stupid, populist policies, that deny the cause of global warming.

We should leave the smelter alone and stop kowtowing to those Jafa pricks.

Yours sincerely,
a "jafa"

Posted at 5:44PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Fuck 'em.

I agree. And having dug some more into it, there's an economic case.

A few years ago Comalco threw another tanty as part of its "negotiations" with meridian for electricity supply. As part of that, it produced a report which estimated the benefits of the smelter at NZ$121 million per year. This includes company taxes, wages, and deferred investment in the electricity network (having our second-largest power station tied up only being able to send power to Invercargill apparently being a benefit to society).

Tiwai Point uses around 15% of our electricity. This is more than the amount we generate from coal (12.2% in 2006). So by removing Tiwai Point and building some new grid assets, we could stop burning coal entirely.

In 2006, Huntly (the only coal-fired power plant) was responsible for 4.671 MT of CO2 (New Zealand Energy Greenhouse Emissions 1990 - 2006). At a price of $25/ton, that works out to $116.8 million a year. So, it's looking pretty marginal already. Factor in rising carbon prices, and you don't have to go far before Tiwai Point is a net drain on our economy.

(And remember, the cost of grid upgrades is included in Comalco's "benefits" - so the moment emissions costs look higher than Comalco's figures of $121 million a year - as they would be if carbon prices rose to $30/ton or if I'd used 2005 emissions figures for coal - then we should shut it down and build some wires. Some of which I should add we are now building anyway).

Hoist by their own petard.

Posted at 5:57PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Just say "we put this question to the Minister, and s/he declined to answer".

We could even have someone dissect their evasion. "Rather than answer the question, the spokesperson brought up an irrelevant topic"

And after those short messages, time that would have been wasted watching the interviewee evade the question is replaced by cute footage of otters.

Posted at 7:18PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

I think it was a bloody good sting - the dairy owner who clearly knew what was going on, what he was providing, and for what purpose.

Maybe. Or maybe the reporters wound him up a bit and edited it out. And I fail to see what the fact that perfectly legal household substances are available in normal shops is an issue. If an actual drug maker wanted those chemicals, them they could reasonably have said that they wanted the meths to fuel a fish smoker and isopropyl to clean computer screens.

I wouldn't be surprised if the guy is run out of town.

You mean assault, intimidation and possible kidnap.

To me, an interesting story would be why a respectable NZ journalist considers that such activity is "unsurprising" and writes of it with no tone of condemnation.

Personally, rather than see harmless dairy owners hounded, I'd prefer to watch Ms Lewis get her tits out.

Posted at 7:21PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

To me, an interesting story would be why a respectable NZ journalist considers that such activity is "unsurprising" and writes of it with no tone of condemnation.

Or why they seem to think that retailers should engage in widespread surveillance of people's purchasing habits on behalf of the police.

I mean, isn't that just a little totalitarian?

Posted at 7:28PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

One thing the business people lining up with their special pleading against the ETS don't mention, is that countries which are taking action against global warming are increasingly looking at how they can encourage those that don't.

The EU is considering a carbon tariff on imports for instance. So if we don't implement an ETS that is suited to our economy, the EU will just impose duty on anything (like my consultancy fees) being imported into their continent.

I know which I prefer.

Posted at 8:32PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Rich: yes. Those threatening "carbon leakage" are also displaying an attitude of deep denial on political action against climate change as well. Sure, you can move elsewhere. But it will do you no good, as one way or another, you will be paying for that carbon in ten years' time.

Rio Tinto is also incorrect when they say we'll be the "first in the world" to impose carbon costs. The EU has been emissions trading for a few years now (they've almost worked the bugs out), so aluminium smelters over there are already paying for the carbon in their electricity.

Posted at 8:54PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

So what does the government promise to do - tax a world leading carbon efficient, hydro powered smelter at Tiwai and minimise the fuel costs for Aucklanders whilst building more roads. Nimbyistic, stupid, populist policies, that deny the cause of global warming.

I'm not sure where Tiwai will end up after the carbon trading scheme impacts upon electricity. Given that they already have their own special deal for electricity, I'd imagine they'll negotiate appropriately and end up staying here. Instead of the amount they pay all being 'cost', some will be tax, the rest cost. It'll balance in the end.

Tiwai Point uses around 15% of our electricity. This is more than the amount we generate from coal (12.2% in 2006). So by removing Tiwai Point and building some new grid assets, we could stop burning coal entirely.

I can't imagine the grid assets would be that massive. There's some major grid assets up the road with the other lakes, it's not like it'd be 500 miles of lines or anything. It would probably mean upgrades of the cook strait link, but that's happening already.

And after those short messages, time that would have been wasted watching the interviewee evade the question is replaced by cute footage of otters.

And my life is complete! DO IT!

Posted at 10:28PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

Kyle: they were pricing on the need to upgrade the Cook Strait Cable. Transpower is doing that already, so they just need a big line to get the power from manapouri (or Invercargill) north. And that's the cheap part of the deal.

And Rio Tinto's special pleading is even more obnoxious when you consider that they're already goign to be getting a free ride courtesy of the NZ taxpayer, with a fat wodge of carbon credits to compensate them for higher power prices. Really, one of their competitors should take us to the WTO over such a blatant subsidy.

Posted at 11:03PM on 13 May 08. Permalink.

It's not all oneway traffic of power going north. In these coming months the south will suck up a bit of the fossil fuel generate power.

We need more local generation a wee chat about windfarms on the West Coast of Auckland & Banks Peninsula etc.

Does China have the same need for aluminium as it does for steel? If so this is a hollow threat.