Posts by Alastair Jamieson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Are there any other cities in the world built on an active volcanic field like ours?
The short answer is no.
The slightly longer answer is that there are plenty of cities near to volcanoes (e.g. Naples near Vesuvius in Italy), and plenty of other basalt volcanic fields similar to ours (e.g. West Eifel volcanic field in Germany, or Craters of the Moon in Idaho), but no other city is located directly on top of a volcanic field like Auckland is. It's part of what makes the place unique!Aside from any future hazards it might pose, the Auckland Volcanic Field is on NZ's tentative list for nomination as a World Heritage Site, for its outstanding geological, archaeological and (in the case of Rangitoto) ecological values.
-
Actually, as I understand it, the Auckland sort of volcano doesn't erupt twice on one site. So the next one to blow will be anywhere but at the location of an existing cone.
That's generally the case, but recent research at the University of Auckland has shown that things can be a bit more complicated. The composition of lava and ash from Rangitoto has now conclusively shown that it is the result of two quite separate eruptions (probably a few decades apart), while evidence suggests that Pupuke volcano erupted on more than one occasion.
The most disturbing thing is that there's now evidence that the volcanoes aren't all necessarily separated very distantly through time. This raises the possibility of several volcanoes erupting in different parts of Auckland within a relatively short period (i.e. decades not thousands of years), or perhaps even simultaneously.
But I still think that Auckland's better off than the more earthquake-prone parts of the country in one respect: We will get some warning (days to weeks) of the next eruption, whereas earthquakes are entirely unpredictable.
In the past, the region has also been affected more frequently by ash from central North Island volcanoes and Taranaki, than by local eruptions.
-
I'm just going to jump in here with an early nomination for Eyjafjallajokull as PA Word of the Year. We may have all learned to pronounce by the time Russell actually calls for entries later in the year...
-
To have a discussion that was in any way 'rational', you'd need to have sufficient information available on both sides of the argument.
Regardless of the truth in any of the claims, the mining debate so far has been couched entirely in terms defined by the government: i.e. the economic value of the mining proposals. Even the voices against it have focused on economic issues such as the effects on tourism and NZ's international reputation.
To really get 'rational', we'd need to look in detail at the other side of the story - the ecological and environmental values at stake.
Some examples of the pertinent information that say, the Minister for Conservation, Kate Wilkinson, could usefully contribute to the 'discussion' include:
- What percentage of NZ's lowland ecosystems have been destroyed or significantly modified?
- What percentage of NZ's lowland ecosystems enjoy legal and physical protection; sufficient to maintain their ecosystem processes and the viability of the populations of native species which inhabit them?
- Populations of what native species occupy the areas proposed to be mined?
- Which of these species is classified as threatened?
- Which native species populations (and ecosystem interactions) would be vulnerable to the effects of the proposed mining?
- What are the values of nearby natural areas, or ecological features in the catchments of the areas identified that could be adversely affected by the proposed mining? (In the cases of the Great Barrier Island and Coromandel Peninsula sites, the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park springs to mind).
- What other environmental, cultural, historical and landscape features and values may be affected by the proposed mines?
Until coherent and detailed information on these kinds of issues is brought into the mining 'discussion', it will remain far from rational.
-
I don't really have the budget to be swigging Emersons or Epic right and left.
No, nor do I (it's usually Mac's Hoprocker or Sassy Red from the supermarket), however you'd think the govenment could splash out a little when entertaining foreign dignitaries.
-
I'll be the first one to have a celebratory beer when NZ becomes a republic, but in the meantime that photo was all wrong.
If the PM's going to entertain royalty, at least he should do it properly, and getting the guest to cook the fillet steak isn't properly. Nor is drinking crap beer. They should have served something decent like Emerson's organic pilsner, 5000 litres of which (in other news) have just gone tragically to waste...
-
It's not credit card fraud that bothers me so much as extortion - how can Westpac Visa justify a 1/2% interest rate increase - just in time for Christmas?
-
I hesitate to spread this around, but if it's conspiracy theories you're after, get a load of this:
BTW, he's not really a 'climate change expert'....
-
You can watch the NZ Tsunami Gauge network here. You need to manually refresh the page, which seems to update at around 5 minute intervals. Nothing noticeable at Raoul Island as I write...
-
Two very different 'technology' offerings:
OMD - ElectricityRadiohead - Airbag