Global warming is global. Everyone is affected. While I can see the points being raised by the few who can see or hear wind farms, we should all stop thinking about ourselves and think of everyone else.

And as it turns out, New Zealand, per capita is the 12th largest emitter of green-house gases. So, despite claiming to be 'green' / 'pure' etc etc, we are actually in the club of big offenders for causing climate change...

Unforutnatly windmills are going to be in view of someones back yard.. So are schools, roads, movie theatres, power lines, tv masts, cell phone towers, boy racer rubber, etc etc etc...

There is so much mis-information going on about this..

Are you suggesting it is our power generation industry that puts us at number 12?

I suspect our green house gas emmissions extend well beyond power alone.

The fuel in our cars is less green than many other countries, we recycle less than many other countries, we drive around in more V8 cars than many other countries. Our ferries have no mechanisms for preventing or collecting emmissions.

I don't see how a wind farm will fix these and other problems.

I read my orginal post to make sure of what i wrote. I did not suggest that our power generation industry puts us at Number 12. I simply stated that per capita, NZ is the 12th biggest emitter. It is you that have drawn the conclusion of what i am suggesting.

Detailed infromation on NZ's Greenhouse emmissions between 1990 and 2006 is avialable at
http://www.med.govt.nz/energy/ghg

NZ's total greenhouse gas emissions are about 0.3% of the global total, but the 12th highest per capita. If we make no changes to the way in which we use and generate energy, our emissions are projected to rise a further 39% by 2030.

My opinion is that it would be irresponsible not to make some kind of changes to reduce this.


Could you provide the data on which you make the statement about 'green-ness' of fuel in NZ, and the number of V8 cars driven in NZ, vs the rest of the world. I feel it would be helpful to ensure the factualness of data, and not make rash statements.

A perhaps more useful comment is that 44% of total energy use in NZ is due to transport. NZ has a high level of car ownership, public transport use that is low, but increasing, and a limited rail network becuase of its geography and small population.. ( data from the NZ Energy Strategy | 2007, published two weeks ago by the MED )

To address your question about how wind farms will contribute to a reduction in green-house emmissions.

(1) Directly. Installation of zero-emission generation (aka windmills) will reduce the requirement to use carbon emitting generation.. ( ie gas / oil generation ).. So, we will re

(2) Indirectly. Installation of further zero emission generation, will allow NZ to start tranistioning its transport fleet from hydrocarbon powered ( ie petrol/diesel ), to electric powered veichles. NZ coud'nt sustain supporting those without more generation capacity.

Your comment that windmills are zero-emission generation is interesting. Maybe once they are generating they have zero-emission but getting them to that point is not as environmentally friendly as the wind industry would have us believe with huge amounts of concrete in the bases, not to mention the carbon miles used bringing the things to NZ and then in the case of Puketiro there are the trees being cut down to make room for them - but then maybe those trees were due to come down anyway? And then there is the back-up power stations required. If you have been following the infomration on Contact's new proposed windfarm near Port Waikato there was a lot of ra-ra-ra about the wind farm and there in the small print is the fact that they will be building a gas-fired power plant in Taranaki for back up. And then if you read Thursdays Dominion Post article from The Times that says "The feeble intellectual response of Europe and America to this energy challenge is becoming a matter not of concern but of alarm. The use of food crops for biofuels, the hobbling of energy companies with the obligation to use unreliable and expensive alternatives and the lack of investment in nuclear power is frightening......we should leave our fantasies behind, acknowledge that carbon emissions will continue to grow and plan accordingly."

Yes, considering the impact of "how" this is built, as well as "what" is built is important, i totally agree.

It would be interesting to be able to quantify the environmental cost ( say in tonnes of carbon ) that the construction of the proposed wind farm will be, and then compare that to the projected energy that the mills will product over their useful economic life. Perhaps this is a question that can be asked of the developers. In comparison I'd also like to get some data on building a similar sized gas plant, and look at its carbon cost over its economic lifespan.

As far as the backup stations, you have a choice, have power on windy days only, or have security of supply... The net result of wind farm + gas fired backup is much better than gas fired only. The only other reliable supply is nucelar of which NZ is unlikely to go near. Over time, if enough mills were built geographically dispersed across NZ, the chance of all mills not producing becomes less and less, and eventually the number of 'backup' stations would not be nearly as much.. NZ could probably get to a point where geothermal, hydro and wind will be enough to power the country.

One big thing NZers could do, is run their homes a lot more energy efficently.. I know in our home, after spending approx $600, we have reduced our electricty spend by about $45 a month. Good economics, but also good for the environment. If everyone made a small effort to reduce their power consumption, we woud'nt need so many generation plants..

Its a great question you've asked though, and i hope that they can give us all an answer so we catagorically know one way or the other.

A bit off-topic - but just interested - 6phr what did you do in your home to reduce your power bill?

(1) replaced all our lighting with either Compact Floresents or High Power LEDS..( which admittably, i got very cheap ) Getting rid of those Halogen pin spots was a good start

(2a) Reduced the hot water temp from 65 to 58C.
(3a) Hot water cylinder blanket
(4a) insulated all the hot water pipes as far as possible ( could'nt get into wall spaces, but most our pipes are in the roof space which is eay to get to.

(3) sealed up all the gaps, cracks and spaces, that made the place drafty..

(4) Put a timer on the towel rail heater, so that it only was on for 4 hours a day, rather than 24/day..

(5) made some tweaks to our water pumping.. ( on rain supply

(6) Put energy saving software on all the computers, ( we have 4 in the house.. sigh! ), so that stuff goes into sleep mode, when its not being used.


This summer, i'm installing some solar hot water heating.. A bit of an interesing system using some very cheap chinese heater units, with some kiwi modification to make them work.. No good for peopel on town supply mind you..

I'm seriously contemplating installing double glazed windows, (we have a glazier in the family so that helps ).

This is an excellent example 6phr of someone making the effort and doing something about the environment (and possibly your own electricity costs). I believe there are some form of government subsidies in place for solar heating, but maybe there should be more encouragement. By reducing our need for electricity (I'm sure I read it was going up by 2% a year), we can avoid the need for turbines in our back yards and start looking at alternative ways to reduce our emmissions.

Great to see someone taking the initiative.

I totally agree. I would far rather see initiatives and incentives that reduce power consumption rather than those to increase production. When effort goes into generating more power people sit back and think that it is okay to continue to consume energy as there is still plenty of it. But the only ones who win out of that scenario are the power companies.

There is plenty of incentive to take some sensible and reletively low cost steps around your house. " its saves you money "... I don't think that the govermnent really needs to subsidise this further. However what they do need to do, is to EDUCATE. I'm sure that many people hav'nt done things because they simply don't know that its a good idea.

However its not an either or stragety. We need to do both.. We need to increase our zero-carbon generation capability, to reduce our reliance on oil/gas, and we also need to get smarter about how we use energy.

NZ's energy costs historicaly have been very low compared to the rest of the world, and on the whole, it has simply been cheaper to use more energy, than invest to use it more efficently. ( ie better insulation etc ). But that is rapdily changing..

Diane, i aggree with you. We should'nt need to produce more energy. But we should be substituting generation that is carbon producing with those that are not.

I disaggre with you, on the only people who benefit. Industry that is reliant on electrity also benefits. The best example of that is the aluminium smelter.. They need lots of cheap power..

Mind you, I have been wondering if we woudl be better to shut down the aluminum smelter, and divert all the manapouri power into the grid, that earn export dollars..