Maybe it’s just me but it seems there is a huge amount of press reports at the moment on the environment. The environment has become a pressure point for politicians, and this is probably true because there are a lot of voters who are influenced by what seems good and true but in reality is not. We should not be surprised if politicians around the world jump on band wagons because this is what politicians do.

In NZ we have even had John Key (by the way there is no “s” in his surname) coming out and saying that the climate change is a real problem and protection of the environment is important. Of course then we had the Greens co-leader Russel Norman (and his first name does only have one L) saying -

“This was an opportunity for the National Party to show it is serious about the environment and willing to integrate an ecological perspective within its core economic and business tax framework. Instead, John Key made no mention of the environment as being a factor in his list of ten tax priorities for the future.”

Well Russel, the environment has nothing to do with taxes. Words like Carbon Neutral mean absolutely nothing at all. John Key said “But Labour’s goal of carbon neutrality is totally unrealistic.  It would require us to shut down all the factories, turn out all the lights, and scrap all our vehicles.”

Carbon neutrality is difficult when Carbon is the fourth most common element in the universe.

Consider the following facts –

·         86% of global energy production comes from oil, gas and coal in that order. We are talking about electricity energy production.

·         Energy demand in advanced economies has risen 10% since 1990 and 59% since 1967. There are more populous nations that have not reached the peak consumption levels of the industrialized world for electricity.

·         We need more electricity, no question about that and unless you are Jeanette Fitzsimmons or Prince Charles, or living in a thatched hut and using candles.

·         Coal is the cheapest way to generate power, and has the most abundant source to do this. It is unfortunately one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gases.

In an ideal world we would all rely on solar or wind power but nether is sufficiently reliable for “baseload” power. Baseload power is what switches the lights on, or powers the kettle or the shower and it has to work all of the time. Without reliable baseload power our offices and factories would grind to a halt, and our economies would go down the toilet.

  The cleanest baseload power is hydro but this has become very unpopular in most countries including NZ. The only other reliable baseload power option left is, well come in close now because I would not want too many people to hear me say the word –N u c l e a r. These power stations have generated billions of gigawatts of power while emitting no greenhouse gases. Despite all of the rhetoric and emotion about nuclear power, in its 55-year history, nuclear energy has an exemplary safety record. Fewer people have died from its use than are killed weekly by coal; from burning it and mining it. Plus modern nuclear power stations are not like older power stations anymore than modern cars are like 40 year old cars. This seems to be a point completely missed by those who are against nuclear power. The photo above is of Drax power station in North Yorkshire in England which is the largest coal-fired power station in Western Europe. It produces 4000 megawatts of power and burns 14 million tons of coal dust per year.

So you would have to say the world has the means to make changes to climate change but not the will.  Japan has 55 nuclear power plants which supply one third of its power needs and wants to build 11 more. The photo on the left (the Ikata power station with three reactors generating 1922 megawatts) looks so clean you could probably fish right next to it. The fish are easy to catch as they are the ones that glow orange in the dark!

 In New Zealand since Labour came to power in 1999, 85% of all new power generation has come from coal fired power stations. The Prime Minister Helen Clark has admitted that she sought no advice from officials before declaring making statements about making NZ carbon neutral. It’s called making up policy on the hoof.

So what about Wind power generation? It is unreliable and visually ugly because we are not talking small little quant wind mills here but huge ugly wind turbines (100 metres tall), many of which create extra noise pollution. A report in the Daily Telegraph on December 19^th showed that despite spending millions, wind power in England and Wales does not generate the power that it was meant to. And this report was based on 500 turbines in operation. Even on the west facing coastline of Cornwell the efficiency was 24.1%. The most efficient turbines are in offshore wind farms in Scotland which average 32.6%. And the most effective place to install these is offshore close to large cities so you lose the minimum amount of power through transmitting it long distances. The worst turbine is the one attached to the headquarters of Renewable Energy Systems which has an efficiency of 7.7%.

Of course if we applied the “Dust to Dust” principle to this turbine I think the results might show it is not zero-carbon at all.

Renewable Resource Power Generation

Generating power from solar, wind, wave and possible hydro can be considered carbon free (if you exclude the manufacturing carbon costs of the machinery) and if you want to avoid harming the environment and cannot bring yourself to use the obvious solution –n u c l e a r  then this is the way to go. But of these only hydro can provide baseload power. Solar and wind will not provide baseload as they are too unreliable.

While there are several wave power schemes under consideration in New Zealand, none have started yet and they have the following advantages.

These generators work on currents which are available most of the day; there are no days when the tide does not come in or go out and they are under the water so no one sees them.