New centrist green party?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › New centrist green party?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 11

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173199 5-Feb-2019 09:16

You cannot shut down coal and gas and replace it with hydro until you add the hydro. There seems to be little interest in hydro, now and in recent years.

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2173201 5-Feb-2019 09:20

tdgeek:

You cannot shut down coal and gas and replace it with hydro until you add the hydro. There seems to be little interest in hydro, now and in recent years.

Well guess what, there is more interest in hydro than coal. I promise you that. Coal belongs in the 1950's, times have changed.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173209 5-Feb-2019 09:28

Darude34:

tdgeek:

You cannot shut down coal and gas and replace it with hydro until you add the hydro. There seems to be little interest in hydro, now and in recent years.

Well guess what, there is more interest in hydro than coal. I promise you that. Coal belongs in the 1950's, times have changed.

I don't guess. Give me a list of hydro proposals offered by any Govt in the last 20 years. Refer your comments to those that run the country and those that vote them in. Your ideas seem to be just ideas

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2173213 5-Feb-2019 09:30

tdgeek:

Darude34:

tdgeek:

You cannot shut down coal and gas and replace it with hydro until you add the hydro. There seems to be little interest in hydro, now and in recent years.

Well guess what, there is more interest in hydro than coal. I promise you that. Coal belongs in the 1950's, times have changed.

I don't guess. Give me a list of hydro proposals offered by any Govt in the last 20 years. Refer your comments to those that run the country and those that vote them in. Your ideas seem to be just ideas

I have not heard of a single person in NZ who would opt for new coal over hydro. That was my point, not government proposals.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173217 5-Feb-2019 09:35

Darude34:

tdgeek:

Darude34:

tdgeek:

You cannot shut down coal and gas and replace it with hydro until you add the hydro. There seems to be little interest in hydro, now and in recent years.

Well guess what, there is more interest in hydro than coal. I promise you that. Coal belongs in the 1950's, times have changed.

I don't guess. Give me a list of hydro proposals offered by any Govt in the last 20 years. Refer your comments to those that run the country and those that vote them in. Your ideas seem to be just ideas

I have not heard of a single person in NZ who would opt for new coal over hydro. That was my point, not government proposals.

Who has been discussing new coal mines, here or anywhere. Bizarre

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173222 5-Feb-2019 09:38

In fact, I will be ignoring your posts, you are always going around in circles and tangents

Varkk

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2173231 5-Feb-2019 09:51

tdgeek:

Darude34:

tdgeek:

You cannot shut down coal and gas and replace it with hydro until you add the hydro. There seems to be little interest in hydro, now and in recent years.

Well guess what, there is more interest in hydro than coal. I promise you that. Coal belongs in the 1950's, times have changed.

I don't guess. Give me a list of hydro proposals offered by any Govt in the last 20 years. Refer your comments to those that run the country and those that vote them in. Your ideas seem to be just ideas

There are several new hydro schemes commissioned in the last ten years and a few more in the current planning stages. They are mostly smaller schemes nothing on the scale of the Clyde dam.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173254 5-Feb-2019 10:03

Varkk:

tdgeek:

Darude34:

tdgeek:

You cannot shut down coal and gas and replace it with hydro until you add the hydro. There seems to be little interest in hydro, now and in recent years.

Well guess what, there is more interest in hydro than coal. I promise you that. Coal belongs in the 1950's, times have changed.

I don't guess. Give me a list of hydro proposals offered by any Govt in the last 20 years. Refer your comments to those that run the country and those that vote them in. Your ideas seem to be just ideas

There are several new hydro schemes commissioned in the last ten years and a few more in the current planning stages. They are mostly smaller schemes nothing on the scale of the Clyde dam.

Yes, that's exactly right. I didn't see then as relevant as they are small, I think some are private? To breach the 100% goal, we do need BIG. But the Greens are bothered about the environment. I think a dam uses about 75 square km (reservoir). Its not large. For the sake of a few plants and wildlife that can be grown elsewhere nearby, and some environment titivation, we should push ahead for 100% green energy, hydro being the main use. Solar is apparently a no go, wind is probably not worth the benefit for the cost/land area

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#2173263 5-Feb-2019 10:25

Darude34: I promise you that. Coal belongs in the 1950's, times have changed.

So you also advocate closing NZ Steel at Glenbrook as well, putting thousands out of work?

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2173265 5-Feb-2019 10:27

tdgeek:
Fred99:

tdgeek:

We are not 100% renewable, so we use coal. Until we are 100% renewable coal is fine, as it has to be.

No it's not. Coal produces almost double the CO2 per unit of electricity generated as natural gas.

Do we have enough gas to remove all coal generation?

Unlikely, Especially considering that Labour/ Greens have banned oil drilling/ exploration. As Natural gas prices increase, coal would get used more and more. As the running costs of gas generation start to exceed that of coal generation.

Then large industry will switch from Natural gas to coal. Hospitals, dairy factories, meat works, large hotels etc. Anyone that runs large boilers.

There is a rumored massive gas field east of Christchurch. Which is supposedly large enough for NZ to get into the LNG export market. And which would provide jobs, royalty income to the government, and price coal out of the market. But thanks to Labour/ Greens, we are stuck with coal. And we may have to start importing LNG and LPG. (currently NZ exports LPG).

Labor probably likes coal anyway. More unionized workers needed for coal mines. And the railways would be needed to transport coal all over NZ.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173276 5-Feb-2019 10:39

Oil exploration/drilling is not banned, NEW is banned. From what I read a while back, the industry has its current untapped fields to work through, so there is plenty of time. These fields are already booked, they are excluded as they are not new exploration. The ongoing theme is that its all going to shut down next week and Taranaki will be screwed. Thats not to say there isn't any merit in what you say, but its actually misleading

Varkk

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2173279 5-Feb-2019 10:42

tdgeek:

Yes, that's exactly right. I didn't see then as relevant as they are small, I think some are private? To breach the 100% goal, we do need BIG. But the Greens are bothered about the environment. I think a dam uses about 75 square km (reservoir). Its not large. For the sake of a few plants and wildlife that can be grown elsewhere nearby, and some environment titivation, we should push ahead for 100% green energy, hydro being the main use. Solar is apparently a no go, wind is probably not worth the benefit for the cost/land area

A large hydro dam can actually create a lot of greenhouse emissions, first the manufacturing and curing of the concrete produces a lot. Secondly the rotting of the vegetation flooded by the dam releases a lot. Small scale ones fare much better in this comparison as they need less concrete (The amount used doesn't scale linearly as you increase capacity) Also you can be more picky about the area you flood to decrease the vegetation being destroyed. Also dams aren't the only way to produce hydro power as you can use bypass schemes etc. I think a few of the smaller scale schemes use that. Finally most of the convenient places to place a large dam have already been done.

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2173287 5-Feb-2019 10:52

All of those emissions are one off though. And a well designed dam will easily last for 100 years. So the initial emissions will get offset many times over from less fossil fuels needed.

Bypass scheme are not as useful as storage schemes. As you can't store water during low usage periods for later use during peak demand. And having the ability to rapidly increase output to max (even during dry periods) Makes it far easier to integrate wind generation elsewhere in the power network.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173335 5-Feb-2019 11:08

Its a lot like EV's yes there are emissions creating it, but then you have a huge amount of emissions that wont happen. If NZ got to 100% renewable energy, you can then say you fill your car with water and wind, not petrol

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2173338 5-Feb-2019 11:12

Aredwood:

Labor probably likes coal anyway. More unionized workers needed for coal mines. And the railways would be needed to transport coal all over NZ.

Oh dear. This thread is truly borked - but as an optimist I'll say at least it makes Twitter look sane.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 11