Electricity Commission on nuclear energy & NZ
and while we’re at it, here’s an addition to my lovely table, this time from energy engineer David Haywood:
97 responses to “”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
+64 27 211 3455
email me
Electricity Commission on nuclear energy & NZ
and while we’re at it, here’s an addition to my lovely table, this time from energy engineer David Haywood:
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The election special to end all election specials
http://www.angelfire.com/hero2/ihatela/
He spelled Klingon wrong.
TWO OUT OF THREE!
TWO OUT OF THREE!
TWO OUT OF THREE!
WHAT’S MORE IMPORTANT?
WHAT’S MORE IMPORTANT?
WHAT’S MORE IMPORTANT?
If those things are important now at election time they’re important the rest of the time and what are you doing about them the rest of the time?
A comment on Hemmingway’s comments:
While in the past units of around 1000 MW or more were common for producing nuclear energy, modern proposed pebble-bed reactors are smaller sizes and modular (multiple units can be connected together), and have relatively low capital costs. 200 MW plants are a good size (for a small grid like New Zealand) and China intends to begin constructing units of this size in early 2007. Capital costs for these are in the low hundreds of millions.
In the next five years this should result in nuclear generation being economically viable compared with, for example, wind energy in New Zealand, particularly when you capitalize the cost of grid upgrades to transfer power (eg. for project Aqua, about $1b of grid upgrades were required from memory).
As far as I can tell, nuclear just keeps looking better if we wish to maintain our way of life.
We will be nuclear withing 20 years ….(remember where you heard it first)
Whats more important is the fact that this guy claims to like Startrek and cant spell one of its most recognised and diverse races’ name correctly.
Thats whats more important damnit.
Matt: Not enough. Will probably never be doing enough. But that doesn’t make things more or less important.
“Important things” – I guess you’re talking about how we deal with our environment, adopting a sustainable way of life etc.
I agree, it’s very important. Everyone should plant trees. I love trees.
What do I do about my concerns for the environment? Well, I recycle, use public transport or walk or cycle, love gardening and growing my own stuff to eat, hate polystyrene (sp?), always “carry in – carry out” and try to leave nothing but footprints. I’m very interested in sustainable farming and am currently working as an artisan baker baking fantastic, nutritious sourdough bread using stone ground organic flour and natural starters. I refuse to support Mc Donalds, Nike et al, and try to buy conscientiously, in as much as I am able.
What are you doing?
However, I agree with Tim that there’s other, more important things to worry about with this election – things like the aggressive anti-christian policies of the current government. They are following a neo-marxist agenda, and are actively shoving their political correctness down our throats.
I sometimes feel like those ducks that are bred for foie gras production – every now and then, with increasing regularity, we’re grabbed by the neck, and more crap is forced down our throats, wreaking havoc in the very fabric of society. As we swallow more and more of this garbage, we become increasingly ill.
Now what are we doing about that?
If you’re interested, here’s a great little interactive table on how individual MP’s voted in the last couple of years on conscience votes.
It’s a very simple overview – those that agree with how you see issues such as legalising prostitution etc show up in green, those that don’t in red.
Have fun.
What a humble way you illustrate to us of how much a hero and inspiration you are.
Sam that’s a crap response. Very crap.
Rudy — nah I mean what is Tim doing outside voting time about the things he thinks are more important, which I presume are the same as Voice for Life’s.
Dan — cheers, that’s helpful.
Rudy, how has the socialist government of the past 6 years impinged on your Christianity? I appreciate, for instance, that you proabbly strongly disagree with the Prostitution Bill (&c.), but what effect do these anti-Christian policies actually have on your day-to-day?
Still don’t quite follow your drift, Matt, but then I’m a little dense sometimes (…sometimes he says…?!).
The nuclear power thing is interesting, since it’d be a very tempting way to increase electricity generating capacity. I know there’s been talk of it here lately, since a lot of the nuclear power plants are becoming older and will either have to be phased out or replaced. I guess most people are still very much against, Chernobyl is too close to home, so attitudes’d have to change first.
Thank you Aaron. Truthfully, I feel sorry for Sambo. I guess he honestly doesn’t know any better. And that’s a shame, seeing how he continually makes a complete fool of himself.
(Wait for it…)
Rudy
It is probably for the best that we assume the best of each other. For instance, one might assume that Sam is using a calculated mixture of cynicism, humour and directness, to make a serious point; (incidentally – a form of communication that actually by definition prevents making a fool of oneself).
If we were to not assume the best of each other, one might come to the conclusion that Rudy has made a fool of himself already, by giving a diatribe about how great he is in response to a misunderstanding of what Matthew asked. See how unhelpful one can be my assuming the worst of the opposition?
A more charitable response might be instead to clear up the misunderstanding: Tim suggested the ‘Voice for Life’ issues are more important than others. Matt asked ‘what are you doing about them then?’ In my opinion, that is the question that is left unanswered by a large swathe of the population.
Finally, it is not anyone’s place to feel sorry for anyone else. Feeling sorry for someone achieves nothing.
Humour me, Richard, what’s your opinion regarding the Tim’s assertion that the Voice of Life issues are more important than Voice for environment in this election?
How great I am???!!!!! I’m the most humble guy I know,apart from Chud of course…
In his opinion, those are more pressing concerns. In my opinion, they are not. That’s the point of democracy. That’s the point of the table, too, which was somehow lost on the audience when Matt first posted it.
In my opinion (read: vote), the issues that Voice for Life want addressed by the state are better addressed at a personal level, whereas the issues that Voice for the Environment want addressed are better addressed by the government.
I believe the government is better than individuals at addressing environmental concerns; conversely, I believe individuals are better than the government at addressing ethical concerns, which is why I personally haven’t had an abortion.
I agree with you that the government should stay out of religion. But the fact is that they’re not.
The very parties under the Vote for Environment umbrella don’t share your opinion that government shouldn’t meddle in ethics or religion. In fact, they have a proven track record of actively meddling in religion and determining what we can and cannot believe. They are trying to destroy the Christian basis of NZ society, and actively promote their humanistic religion.
Now if you’re a Christian, aren’t you a little concerned that the government is trying to destroy your religion, your beliefs – your very essence?
How can you support them in this by giving them your vote?
My earlier question remains unanswered – it is a geniune question: what has the government done in the past 6 years to impinge on your Christianity, personally?
legalised murder
Haven’t done it yet but would like to prohibit ‘hate speech’
smaking snot nosed kids
that can’t spell ‘smacking’
smacking umm? i was going to comment but decided against it (was counciled against it by David.
I don’t understand what is so difficult about my question.
What has the government done in the past six years to impinge on your Christianity, personally?
No government is forcing you to have an abortion or to be a prostitute or to get a civil union. If the hate speech bill had been passed, yes, that would be one example. But can someone please identify one concrete thing that this government has done to prevent you living out your religion the way you want to?
I want to give more time to the needy people in my community, but the government taxes me so much so unnecessarily that I have to work longer than I want to simply to support my own family.
…and isn’t it a bit narrow-minded to base any justification on ones’ own personal Christianity? Why should I care about myself? Society as a whole is far more important to me.
‘living out your religion the way you want to’…hmmm.
And what dan said.
before I answer your question which I hope is rhetorical
I have one. Do you hold to the view that their should and is a strict seperation between church and state?
I don’t get the references to “your” religion, “your” christianity.
Do we hold to different religions, Richard?
of course we do Rudy. what has that got to do with anything?
perhaps you could make an effort to stop being irrelevant and simply answer my question.
Why of course…? I’m a Christian – I presumed you were too – are you?
I’m not being irrelevant. I need time to think of a satisfactory answer and just wondered why you think we hold to different religions.
Lighten up.
Having spent six years being persecuted by such a terrible government, with such a frightful social engineering agenda, intent on preventing us from practicing our religion, I thought a list of wrongs would be at your fingertips.
I see it more of a tendancy than a current reality. It’s the way Labour is facing that worries me. They have started down a road which may not look so bad at the moment, but could very well leave us up to our necks in unpleasantries in the not-too-distant-future. It’s a gradual phase in of nasty policy.
I like to think of it as akin to statue carving: a little chip here and there and before you know it, the whole mountain falls down. Dammit. Wrong illustration. Dissertising is doing funky things with my brain.
In summary: I like many of Labour (policy wise), but it’s the things I can see them heading towards that scare me, oh so delightfully illustrated by the hate-speech (peach) proposal. I don’t like the idea of a part-of-the-family type state that I see happening. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe I’m paranoid, but that’s just my call on the whole shibang.
Joint and several liability is a business concept that has applicability to a nation as well. Just as the German nation was in some senses to blame for Auschwitz and Treblinka so is our nation to blame for the holocaust that is the abortion industry.
You do not have to be sucking babies out of the womb any more than you had to be tipping Zyklon B into the showers to be involved.
“No man is an island…”….(John Donne, in case he is not read anymore)
The government has re-defined marriage. The man/woman lifelong, faithful, partnership was modelled on the relationship of Christ and His bride the church. Marriage is therefore, in a sense, a sacrament.
“civil unions” are the entithesis of faithful sacramental worship based as they are on humanistic narcissism.
So the direction of the social policies of the government are away from God. I have mentioned only two areas but reference to drinking ages, privacy rules, prostitution laws, euthanasia, reproductive technology etc could be made.
I know that the state does not define christian marriage. However the state did previously echo the christian definitions of marriage. Just as the state used to echo the christian definition of fornication, adultery etc etc.
Is “Gay Marriage” a judgement on the church, as Doug Wilson believes?
Is the states direction completely irrelevant to our private religion as RDB appears to believe? Is there such a thing as your private religion? If there is, is it worth anything?
What is the gospel? Is it just about private beliefs or is it about the lordship of Christ?
I also know that getting upset at election time about sex is hardly the acme of a living faith IF nothing else is ever addressed by that christian.
However, election time is the logical time to consider factors that inform our voting.
Thankyou Hans, for a reasoned explanation of what you have against a Labour government. That’s all I was asking for.
Richard with your abilities I am astounded you couldn’t have figured out what Hans has said for yourself…….or were you just being provocotive.What about #29……Oh and one more what about Cullens proposal to tax churches??????
I think youll find the answers to your questions here grasshopper
http://www.angelfire.com/band3/la/
The responses on this thread from Tim, Rudy, and Dad (not to mention the silent majority that have chosen not to comment and enlighten me) have proven exactly why I asked the question, insofar as they support my hypothesis that the majority of anti-Labourites cannot actually make a clear or convincing dissertation of what is so wrong with the government.
I mean seriously, re. #29 & #37: do you still think I’m being rhetorical after I’ve spelled my question out twenty-seven times? And indicating Labour’s plans, proposals, and future direction does not answer the question, ‘what have they done to you?’
p.s. I have spoken to Tim offline so he is off the hook
They have sickened me when I see the harm caused by their well meaing meddling e.g. a non existent credible defence strike force(can’t even save the sky tower from a deranged man in a Cessna let alone a terrorist, but instead having L.A.V’s but not soldiers to drive them. Surely this is the key responsibility of any government)
Their lack of protection for the innocent both born and unborn.Indeed murderous intent in the name of woman’s rights.
The thievery by way of taxation to pay for stuff I don’t want, the country doesn’t need and all in the name of their minions continuing to suckle from the teet of granny state.
This pains me and many others Richard I am sure it grieves the LORD
And that’s the point. It’s sort of irrelevant that I wasn’t one of the aborted foetuses (though Mum’s doctor recommended an abortion when she was experiencing partial paralysis while pregnant with me). A government’s power shouldn’t be assessed solely by its positive legislation and how much that infringes on my personal liberties but rather also by the use of its agenda-setting powers and how much it permits, nay, encourages sword-edge-putting and other unsavoury things / things which are abominable to our Creator.
Would you like me to spell out my reasons here, Chud?
certainly, Tim.
Though I hope y’all realise I am just trying to understand your point of view, I don’t intend to attempt to rebutt all your points or convince you that your truth should be the same as mine.
You make some strong points Mr Bartlett (sr). What about ‘giving unto Caesar’, though?
Um, if we’re going to be talking in humanistic terms like “your truth” and “my truth” then it’s probably not worth my while.
Sam: What about it?
Richard, why bother posting stuff at all if it’s going to be a “your truth and my truth, while different, are both true and equally valid” situation?
Like Tim said, this is a waste of time.
indeed but not a penny more!See Romans 12 in answer to you Sambo. The problem particully in ” God’s Own” at the moment though is that the government is in many cases actually the problem ie doing evil. They don’t acknowedge God in fact Ms Clark is an athiest therefore whatever the ruling elite thinks fit goes.
Richard you say “….your truth is the same as my truth”. By this do you mean that truth is relative? or are you losing the arguement?