Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | ... | 22
12806 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1461


  Reply # 1401840 7-Oct-2015 15:43
One person supports this post
Send private message

DizzyD:
sir1963:
joker97: I'm all against selling our country /body etc
However if the rest of the world is going somewhere it's hard not to follow and be the odd kid out at school.
I am not sure whether a Labour govt would have achieved a different result. Helen Clark might have been able to be a bit more persuasive but I'm not sure to what degree, we are but a drop in a tea cup to the rest of them.

A good govt however should legislate ways And draw up policies to protect its sovereignty.



We managed quite well with going Nuke free.
That cost us quite a bit in trade with the US/UK, but it was the right thing to do, and you notice how no later government has tried to change it.



I recon we would have actually been far better off if we had a nuclear power station setup somewhere in the middle of the North island.

When compared to the rest of the developed world, our electricity costs are extremely high. 
Given our electricity prices in NZ, the average person in the street is really the looser. 


You can blame the RMA and compliance costs for that. Now it is very difficult and expensive to setup any power station, as noone wants them in their back yard. Nuclear will only damage NZs green clean image. Due to advances in techonolgy, renewable sources are far better and more affordable. Not to mention that NZ is in on the ring of fire, so is subject to EQs. You only need to see what happened in Japan, and that is a major problem still. You just need one disaster like that, and it kills our tourism market.  It is far too high risk IMO. If they would building nuclear, it would make sense for them to build a nuclear power pant in Auckland , as that is where the population is, and makes it more efficient as, as it has less distance to travel.

1194 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 558


  Reply # 1401842 7-Oct-2015 15:45
Send private message

mattwnz:

You can blame the RMA and compliance costs for that. Now it is very difficult and expensive to setup any power station, as noone wants them in their back yard. Nuclear will only damage NZs green clean image. Due to advances in techonolgy, renewable sources are far better and more affordable. Not to mention that NZ is in on the ring of fire, so is subject to EQs. You only need to see what happened in Japan, and that is a major problem still. You just need one disaster like that, and it kills our tourism market.  It is far too high risk IMO. If they would building nuclear, it would make sense for them to build a nuclear power pant in Auckland , as that is where the population is, and makes it more efficient as, as it has less distance to travel.


Better to build some more hydro-lakes then you get the added tourism and recreational value they bring

 
 
 
 


9258 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2718

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1401843 7-Oct-2015 15:46
One person supports this post
Send private message

sir1963:
joker97: I'm all against selling our country /body etc
However if the rest of the world is going somewhere it's hard not to follow and be the odd kid out at school.
I am not sure whether a Labour govt would have achieved a different result. Helen Clark might have been able to be a bit more persuasive but I'm not sure to what degree, we are but a drop in a tea cup to the rest of them.

A good govt however should legislate ways And draw up policies to protect its sovereignty.



We managed quite well with going Nuke free.
That cost us quite a bit in trade with the US/UK, but it was the right thing to do, and you notice how no later government has tried to change it.



I see no evidence it was the right or wrong thing to do.

Certainly our power costs are enormously high: if having a nuclear power station was a way of changing that, I would say it was the wrong thing to do. 

In terms of weapons, we are not relevant anyway and could not afford Trident etc even if we wanted it.





1288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 267


  Reply # 1401848 7-Oct-2015 15:52
Send private message

gzt:

Canada's dairy subsidy increase is a sure election winner for next week but they will have problems sustaining it in the long term.


The $4.3 billion Canada has promised farmers isn't a subsidy, it's compensation that is to be paid through a series of programs to provide short-term income certainty. Canada intends to pay dairy farmers upfront, annually, for ten years then phase that out over the following five years. Whether its an election-winner next week, I'm not sure. At this time, dairy farmers are saying that TPP is going to send many of them out of business. Smaller, family-owned farms (which is most of them) are not going to be viable, according to farmers. The disappearance of any of them puts rural economies at risk and has a significant flow-on effect. 

Another billion is set to go to compensate the auto industry. 

Since the Canadian government is running an austerity program that extra money has to come from somewhere. 

Of course, the imported dairy products will bring prices down. They say that most of the US milk products will be used in processing food products. Given that the US uses antibiotics and growth hormones in their dairy industry that are illegal in Canada, this raises another can of worms to the surface. Certainly, in Quebec, there is consumer backlash against US horticulture now - the way they are using fracking water without any testing or guidelines for water safety-the safety of the imported food isn't trusted. 

Food insecurity shouldn't be a worry in first world countries. There's a lot of talk about that now. For Canada, at least, the impact on farming is really worrying. 

9258 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2718

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1401849 7-Oct-2015 15:53
One person supports this post
Send private message

mattwnz:
DizzyD:
sir1963:
joker97: I'm all against selling our country /body etc
However if the rest of the world is going somewhere it's hard not to follow and be the odd kid out at school.
I am not sure whether a Labour govt would have achieved a different result. Helen Clark might have been able to be a bit more persuasive but I'm not sure to what degree, we are but a drop in a tea cup to the rest of them.

A good govt however should legislate ways And draw up policies to protect its sovereignty.



We managed quite well with going Nuke free.
That cost us quite a bit in trade with the US/UK, but it was the right thing to do, and you notice how no later government has tried to change it.



I recon we would have actually been far better off if we had a nuclear power station setup somewhere in the middle of the North island.

When compared to the rest of the developed world, our electricity costs are extremely high. 
Given our electricity prices in NZ, the average person in the street is really the looser. 


You can blame the RMA and compliance costs for that. Now it is very difficult and expensive to setup any power station, as noone wants them in their back yard. Nuclear will only damage NZs green clean image. Due to advances in techonolgy, renewable sources are far better and more affordable. Not to mention that NZ is in on the ring of fire, so is subject to EQs. You only need to see what happened in Japan, and that is a major problem still. You just need one disaster like that, and it kills our tourism market.  It is far too high risk IMO. If they would building nuclear, it would make sense for them to build a nuclear power pant in Auckland , as that is where the population is, and makes it more efficient as, as it has less distance to travel.


Trust me, agriculture is busy damaging our clean green image as we speak...!

Fukushima or Long Island do not appear to have had any long term effect on visitors to Japan or the USA. Wildlife in Chernobyl was this week reported as doing extremely well. Something like a Pebble Bed reactor would be a good option.





1288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 267


  Reply # 1401852 7-Oct-2015 16:00
One person supports this post
Send private message

DizzyD: 
I recon we would have actually been far better off if we had a nuclear power station setup somewhere in the middle of the North island.

When compared to the rest of the developed world, our electricity costs are extremely high. 
Given our electricity prices in NZ, the average person in the street is really the looser. 


You do realise that massive decommissioning of nuclear power plants is underway around the world? Europe is predicted to be down to three within the decade. The US is phasing them out. It's happening everywhere.

It's not nuclear that keeps prices low in some other countries - it's government priorities. NZ power prices could be more affordable IF government needed them to be. 

523 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153
Inactive user


  Reply # 1401854 7-Oct-2015 16:06
Send private message

grant_k: 
No way!  We don't need to be poisoning our planet with any more of that toxic crap.  Not just toxic in our lifetime, but toxic for generations to come.  It would be the height of irresponsibility to use nuclear power when we are blessed with some of the best renewable power sources on the planet.


Our planet would be so much worse off if all +/- 430 nuclear power reactors were converted to thermal power/coal stations. 

If you want to argue about the environment, then lets talk about the Huntly Power Station (Our biggest greenhouse gas generator in the country). NZ will be far greener if it was converted to Nuclear. Sure nuclear waste is a problem, but its a manageable problem. That said, this is going off topic.

523 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153
Inactive user


  Reply # 1401860 7-Oct-2015 16:14
Send private message

Elpie: 

You do realise that massive decommissioning of nuclear power plants is underway around the world? Europe is predicted to be down to three within the decade. The US is phasing them out. It's happening everywhere.


Got some sources for such a claim? 
The exact opposite is actually true.

Nuclear power capacity worldwide is increasing steadily, with over 60 reactors under construction in 15 countries. 

Elpie: 
It's not nuclear that keeps prices low in some other countries - it's government priorities. NZ power prices could be more affordable IF government needed them to be. 


Nuclear would drive prices down. Its a cheaper way of producing electricity, and while hydro/solar etc is great for the environment, its expensive.

1288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 267


  Reply # 1401873 7-Oct-2015 16:39
Send private message

DizzyD:
Elpie: 

You do realise that massive decommissioning of nuclear power plants is underway around the world? Europe is predicted to be down to three within the decade. The US is phasing them out. It's happening everywhere.


Got some sources for such a claim? 
The exact opposite is actually true.

Nuclear power capacity worldwide is increasing steadily, with over 60 reactors under construction in 15 countries.


Hardly an impartial source there 😉 
However, look at their own graphic:http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Nuclear-Power-in-the-World-Today/

And:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_phase-out#Countries_that_have_decided_on_a_phase-out

The US situation:http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2015/01/150101-vermont-yankee-shutdown-us-nuclear-issues/

DizzyD:
Elpie: 
It's not nuclear that keeps prices low in some other countries - it's government priorities. NZ power prices could be more affordable IF government needed them to be. 


Nuclear would drive prices down. Its a cheaper way of producing electricity, and while hydro/solar etc is great for the environment, its expensive.


Lower prices at production do not always equate to lower prices for consumers. Governments have it in their power to regulate the costs of electricity. In comparing NZ costs you need to compare apples with apples - against other countries that have a similar market structure and similar challenges with generation. 


1194 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 558


  Reply # 1401922 7-Oct-2015 17:07
One person supports this post
Send private message

Elpie:
DizzyD:
Elpie: 

You do realise that massive decommissioning of nuclear power plants is underway around the world? Europe is predicted to be down to three within the decade. The US is phasing them out. It's happening everywhere.


Got some sources for such a claim? 
The exact opposite is actually true.

Nuclear power capacity worldwide is increasing steadily, with over 60 reactors under construction in 15 countries.


Hardly an impartial source there 😉 
However, look at their own graphic:http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Nuclear-Power-in-the-World-Today/

And:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_phase-out#Countries_that_have_decided_on_a_phase-out

The US situation:http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2015/01/150101-vermont-yankee-shutdown-us-nuclear-issues/

DizzyD:
Elpie: 
It's not nuclear that keeps prices low in some other countries - it's government priorities. NZ power prices could be more affordable IF government needed them to be. 


Nuclear would drive prices down. Its a cheaper way of producing electricity, and while hydro/solar etc is great for the environment, its expensive.


Lower prices at production do not always equate to lower prices for consumers. Governments have it in their power to regulate the costs of electricity. In comparing NZ costs you need to compare apples with apples - against other countries that have a similar market structure and similar challenges with generation. 


To quote from one of your links:

 

Europe

 

Finland and France are both expanding their fleets of nuclear power plants with the 1650 MWe EPR from Areva, two of which are also being built in China. Several countries in Eastern Europe are currently constructing or have firm plans to build new nuclear power plants (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey).

 

A UK government energy paper in mid-2006 endorsed the replacement of the country’s ageing fleet of nuclear reactors with new nuclear build, and four 1600 MWe French units are planned for operation by 2023. The government aims to have 16 GWe of new nuclear capacity operating by 2030.

 

Sweden has abandoned its plans to prematurely decommission its nuclear power, and is now investing heavily in life extensions and uprates. Hungary, Slovakia and Spain are all implementing or planning for life extensions on existing plants. Germany agreed to extend the operating lives of its nuclear plants, reversing an earlier intention to shut them down, but has again reversed policy following the Fukushima accident.

 

Poland is developing a nuclear program, with 6000 MWe planned. Estonia and Latvia are involved in a joint project with established nuclear power producer Lithuania. Belarus has started construction of its first Russian reactor, and a second is due to follow

Did you mean "three countries" when you said "three" above?

12806 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1461


  Reply # 1401944 7-Oct-2015 18:23
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:
Fukushima or Long Island do not appear to have had any long term effect on visitors to Japan or the USA. Wildlife in Chernobyl was this week reported as doing extremely well. Something like a Pebble Bed reactor would be a good option.


Although you don't generally visit Japan for it's clean green image. The thing about radiation is that you don't know how it affects you until years later. I read that apparently wildlife is doing well 30 years after Chernobyl, but there is no research as to how healthy the wildlife actually is, and whether there are mutations. It looks to be a feel good story, rather than based on to much fact. Dairy etc maybe causing some damage, but we do have rules around that to minimize effects, and it is not even in the same realm as to the type the damage radiation can cause.

4928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2248

Subscriber

  Reply # 1401952 7-Oct-2015 18:40
Send private message

Geektastic: 

Not sure why the location of a PM's holiday home is a relevant factor...


Hard to get Obama to come here to play golf.





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


2200 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 840


  Reply # 1401960 7-Oct-2015 19:07
3 people support this post
Send private message

frankv: Adequate & universal tertiary student allowances


Not quite.

Firstly, allowances were never as adequate as you seem to think, and you couldn't get them at all at uni until you were 18.  So I remember getting nothing for my first year.

Secondly, what was affordable to the Treasury when a small proportion of people went on to tertiary study isn't affordable when a large proportion go on to tertiary study.

Thirdly, the Government still spends up large on EFTS subsidies, allowances and student loans - in fact, measured pretty much however you like (nominal dollars, real dollars, proportion of govt revenue) they spend more than they used to in the era you hark back to.

A Prime Minister with a bach at Hatfields Beach rather than a holiday home in Hawaii


And how exactly is the location of the Prime Minister's holiday home relevant to a discussion on trade policy?

Effective EDs where you didn't have to wait 12 hours for treatment


EDs were always an issue. There have always been hand wavy media stories about waiting times, funding, and doctor/nurse numbers. In reality, governments of both stripes have steadily raised health expenditure over recent decades, and when you look at the performance of our health system we don't stack up too badly against other countries. Our EDs face some challenges, but they are actually pretty good.

Health insurance being unnecessary


A significantly lower proportion of people have health insurance now than they used to. While it is nice for electives etc, it isn't strictly necessary - if you need life saving treatment (car crash, heart attack) , you will still wind up in a public hospital, and get pretty much what you need very quickly. And as good as it ever was.

High employment, with it being normal for students to get well-paid holiday work


Partially true. But holiday work was always difficult to get in the 80s (as I well remember) and the statistics aren't that accurate - there was a lot of disguised unemployment in featherbedded govt departments (rail, forestry etc). Plus, there is a lot more going on than just trade/economic policy. The reality is that work is changing and, in general, there is an ongoing trend for smaller proportion of jobs to be able to be done by those with low numeracy and literacy, as technology changes etc. While trade changes may have accelerated this in NZ, it was happening anyway. Those with low/no skills are finding it harder, but I suspect that was always going to happen.

No beggars on Queen St


Yes. They are a blight.

Safe communities where it was normal for children to walk to & from school unaccompanied


They still can. Media hysteria notwithstanding, many tens of thousands of children still walk too and from school with a high degree of safety. Moreover, they are more at risk from increased road traffic than anything else. We are still a pretty safe place.

EDIT: Grammar

Departed
10298 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4421

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1401965 7-Oct-2015 19:23
One person supports this post
Send private message

DizzyD:
Elpie: 

You do realise that massive decommissioning of nuclear power plants is underway around the world? Europe is predicted to be down to three within the decade. The US is phasing them out. It's happening everywhere.


Got some sources for such a claim? 
The exact opposite is actually true.

Nuclear power capacity worldwide is increasing steadily, with over 60 reactors under construction in 15 countries. 

Elpie: 
It's not nuclear that keeps prices low in some other countries - it's government priorities. NZ power prices could be more affordable IF government needed them to be. 


Nuclear would drive prices down. Its a cheaper way of producing electricity, and while hydro/solar etc is great for the environment, its expensive.


NZ has followed other mistakes of other countries, nuclear stupidity is one mistake we should never copy.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


523 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153
Inactive user


  Reply # 1401966 7-Oct-2015 19:28
Send private message

mattwnz: 
Although you don't generally visit Japan for it's clean green image. The thing about radiation is that you don't know how it affects you until years later. I read that apparently wildlife is doing well 30 years after Chernobyl, but there is no research as to how healthy the wildlife actually is, and whether there are mutations.


MikeB4: NZ has followed other mistakes of other countries, nuclear stupidity is one mistake we should never copy.


The world has moved on since the 1980's.

Have a look at Pebble-bed, and Molten salt reactor designs. 

While NZ is still burning coal, other countries have worked out that its far cleaner/greener to go nuclear. Maybe one day we will see some nuclear scientists positions being advertised on Seek. 


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | ... | 22
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Push notifications: A productivity killer
Posted 25-Jul-2017 14:15


Intergen takes SKYCITY to the cloud
Posted 25-Jul-2017 14:04


Nothing nebulous about Microsoft’s cloud-transition
Posted 21-Jul-2017 15:34


We’re spending more on tech, but not as much as Australians
Posted 21-Jul-2017 11:43


Endace announces EndaceFabric for network-wide packet recording
Posted 20-Jul-2017 20:49


Acorn 6: MacOS image editing for the rest of us
Posted 20-Jul-2017 17:04


HTC faces backlash over keyboard pop-up ads
Posted 19-Jul-2017 15:53


BNZ adds Visa credit cards to Android Pay wallet
Posted 18-Jul-2017 19:44


Still living in a Notification hell – Om Malik
Posted 18-Jul-2017 13:00


Duet Display uses iPad to extend Mac, PC
Posted 18-Jul-2017 10:58


PC sales could be worse
Posted 17-Jul-2017 07:34


Crypto-currencies, tulips, market bubbles
Posted 17-Jul-2017 06:38


NZ Tech Podcast: Big batteries, solar cars, cold war, IoT
Posted 16-Jul-2017 16:53


Vodafone Australia mulls Wisp alliance, NZ implications
Posted 13-Jul-2017 16:49


Rural health professionals see fibre pay-off
Posted 13-Jul-2017 11:52



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.