Kiwiblog

The NZ Herald editorial accuses National of trying to contrive an energy crisis, and says there is little chance of blackouts so there is no crisis.

That is certainly one view – so long as the lights stay on, there is no crisis. But I would say the following
suggest otherwise:

• A $2.5 million conservation campaign
• The lowest lake levels since 1992
• The highest spot prices ever
• Thermal power running full bore (meaning more money paid to the Russians under Kyoto)
• Having to operate a moth balled asbestos ridden plant that is so dangerous workers have to wear protection suits to run it
• Consideration of special legislation to allow lake levels to fall further

UPDATE: The Press editorial takes a different line:

Crisis? What crisis? This is the stock response of any government in denial, which is precisely the mode that the present Labour-led administration is in over looming electricity shortages, with its strained and unconvincing rhetoric about the gravity of the situation, writes The Press in an editorial. …

Even if the lights do stay on in the coming months, there is no room for complacency. A political and industry priority must be to ensure that the regulatory framework is conducive to creating new electricity generation and that the impact of competing demands for water, especially in the South Island, and the effects of climate change are fully considered.

Indeed we need to make it easier and quicker to create new generation – especially for renewable sources.

First of all, here is Colin Espiner on David Parker’s handing of the issue:

Okay then, so the Government says there’s nothing to worry about and the head of the company that transports electricity around the country says that there is. Hmmmmm. Who to believe? Hang on, isn’t there an election at the end of the year?

The best part was near the end of the press conference when Parker rounded on the media for supposedly beating up the story of a crisis, adding that no one could really expect to have a hydro-based power system AND keep the lights burning and industry making things.

Hmmn, this has some implications, such as:

The thing that disturbs me about this comment is that we’re less reliant on hydro power than we used to be. Fast forward ten years. I can almost hear whoever is Energy Minister saying: “You can’t have a wind-based electricity system and still have enough electricity to run everything flat tack in a really calm year.”

Yup. That’s why the rest of the developed world still burns coal and oil, or has nuclear power. You can’t rely on a network dependent on rain and wind – even in Wellington. Was it really only a few months ago that the Government was promising to make New Zealand 95 per cent dependent on renewable energy? Now Huntly’s running full tilt and we’re cheering on Mighty River Power to get its new gas-fired plant up and running as soon as possible.

But why don’t we have enough power? Usage patterns are well known and for years people have been saying we need more. Well Not PC looks at the problem – the RMA. Go read his whole post because it has a huge amount of data, but here’s just one aspect:

Projects Abandoned/Delayed/Restricted due to Resource Management Act :

· Project Aqua, hydro (520 MW) – abandoned 2000-2004
· Marsden B, coal (320 MW) – abandoned 2007
· Wairau Valley, Marlborough, hydro (75 MW) – abandoned 2007
· Whanganui/Tongariro, hydro – Environment Court effectively reduced the Tongariro capacity by one-third due to the “mauri” of the Whanganui river …
· North Bank Tunnel, hydro (260MW) – delayed until at least 2016
· Makara, wind – reduced from 210 to 140MW in 2007
· Project Hayes, wind (150MW) – still in delay
· Te Uku Wind (72MW) – awaiting consents
· Te Waka Wind (111MW) – consent overturned by Environment Court in April, 2007

There isn’t a market failure with energy generation. There is a regulatory failure.

Is anyone else reminded of Dad’s Army? The Government is saying that yes there will be a power saving campaign, but there is absolutely no crisis at all, and no one is allowed to say that word.

It’s like Lance Corporal Jones running around saying “Don’t Panic, Don’t Panic”.

Unlike previous power conservation campaigns, this one will not have a target for savings and there appears to be little outward urgency within the Beehive to achieve big reductions.

Nobody was even willing to say yesterday how much power they hoped the campaign would save.

Energy Minister David Parker said the situation was being managed well and there was no need for a target yet.

“Power cuts are not even an unlikely prospect,” Mr Parker said. “We’re not setting a target at this stage, we’re actually managing things a lot better this time than we’ve previously managed.”

So Corporal Parker is saying nothing at all to worry about.

The chief executive of national grid operator Transpower, Patrick Strange, said the industry was “very concerned” with the situation and he saw it as serious.

A view that seems to be at odds with the actual grid operator.

The Government has spent all year telling us there is no power problem. The reality has been that our capacity has been dangerously low for some years because it is so difficult to get consents for new power plants.

Now consider the latest step to try and stave off power cuts. Workers in breathing gear and protective suits will have to go in to a mothballed asbestos ridden power plant, to supply us with more power.

This comes on top of the lowest lake levels since the 1992 power crisis, big industrial users cutting production (which negatively impacts economic growth) and massive increases in wholesale power rates which will flow through into household bills according to Meridian.

Yet the Government is still trying to say there is no problem. I mean sure it is normal to send workers in hazard suits and breathing gear in to operate asbestos ridden plants.

Again I would ask people to think about whether now is the right time to ban new thermal power plants. Sure do it, after you have made it easier to get consent for renewable power plants, but it would be incredibly reckless to proceed with such a ban- yet David Parker plans to.

Bernard Hickey blogs on looming power cuts:

Transpower Chief Executive Patrick Strange said in announcing the launch of a new website to inform the public on lake levels and power usage that compulsory power cuts were possible within three weeks if there was no significant rainfall or a large power station went off line.

The sad thing with this, is it is all preventable. The RMA slows down massively the construction of new renewable energy plants. That is why 75% to 90% of new capacity has been thermal.

This is why a ban on new thermal is very risky. Look absolutely we should be heading towards renewables, but until we have a consenting process that allows renewable power plants to be agreed to in less than half a decade, then it may be a choice between widespread power cuts over some years or another thermal power station.

So my challenge to the Greens is to support RMA changes that will stop NIMBY types massively slowing down or killing off renewable power projects.