sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

US on holiday; China holds prime rates; Chinese sentiment dives; Taiwan export orders strong; German PPI rise stays very high; green hydrogen project makes progress; UST 10yr 3.23%; gold down and oil holds; NZ$1 = 63.2 USc; TWI-5 = 71.3

Business / news
US on holiday; China holds prime rates; Chinese sentiment dives; Taiwan export orders strong; German PPI rise stays very high; green hydrogen project makes progress; UST 10yr 3.23%; gold down and oil holds; NZ$1 = 63.2 USc; TWI-5 = 71.3

Here's our summary of key economic events overnight that affect New Zealand, with news New Zealand's ambitions to be a green hydrogen superpower are making real progress.

But first up we should note that today is a national holiday in the US, "Juneteenth", commemorating the end of slavery, an end that started in Texas in 1865. (Until last year, it had only been a regional holiday.)

Meanwhile, Chinese authorities reviewed their Prime Loan rates yesterday, and left them unchanged. In late May, their Premier released a 33-point rescue package to avoid an economic contraction in Q2-2022. But rate hikes by global central banks make it difficult for them to ease monetary policy to boost a weak domestic economy. However, analysts expect rate cuts in the second half of 2022 anyway.

The impact of that package of stimulus measures hasn't kicked in yet. One consequence may be that with car sales struggling there, the lithium price is wavering. A sudden new rush in supply seems to have overwhelmed demand and a price correction is expected soon.

And the Chinese price of iron ore is still sinking. And that isn't helping the share price of Aussie miners.

This weakness is also showing up in Chinese consumer sentiment. The latest data released officially is for April and that showed their survey reporting a very sharp drop in confidence from a positive +13 in March to -13 in April. In a record that goes back to 1991, we have never seen a plunge like this in the official survey. Kudos to them for actually releasing such survey data that shows a vast leakage in confidence in the Middle Kingdom.

After a surprise dip in April, Taiwanese export orders bounced back to +US$55 bln and +6.0% higher than a year ago. Orders from American and ASEAN customers were very strong. They were very weak from China and have been all year, a traditional source of strength.

Annual producer price inflation in Germany surged to almost +34% in May from the same month a year ago, breaking a new record peak for a 6th straight month and fractional higher than in April or market forecasts. The figures reflect the effects of the Ukraine war so they are not really a surprise.

In key progress for Southland, Southern Green Hydrogen, a joint venture between Contact Energy and Meridian, has announced that Western Australia's two largest miners would enter final negotiations to develop what could be the world’s largest green hydrogen plant with a reported cost of about NZ$5 bln.

The UST 10yr yield has started the week unchanged at 3.23%. The UST 2-10 rate curve is marginally flatter at +6 bps and their 1-5 curve is unchanged at +48 bps. Their 30 day-10yr curve is also unchanged at +205 bps. The Australian ten year bond is up +4 bps at 4.12%. The China Govt ten year bond is -2 bps lower at 2.81%. And the New Zealand Govt ten year will start today -6 bps lower at 4.23%.

The S&P500 futures indicates Wall Street will open in its Tuesday session about +1.1% above the level it closed at last week. Overnight in Europe, that positive mood prevailed too with markets up more than +1%. Tokyo closed yesterday down -0.7%, Hong Kong was up +0.4%, and Shanghai closed flat. The ASX200 ended its Monday session down -0.6% while the NZX50 ended unchanged.

The price of gold ended yesterday at US$1836/oz and down -US$4.

And oil prices are little-changed from this time yesterday to just over US$108.50/bbl in the US, while the international Brent price is now just over US$112/bbl.

The Kiwi dollar will open today at just on 63.2 USc and +20 bps firmer than this time yesterday. Against the Australian dollar we holding 91.1 AUc. Against the euro we are also holding at 60.2 euro cents. That all means our TWI-5 starts today at just under 71.3, a gain solely due to the retreating greenback.

The bitcoin price has moved sideways from this time yesterday and is now at US$19,866 and up +2.4%. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been very high again at +/- 4.2%.

The easiest place to stay up with event risk today is by following our Economic Calendar here ».

Daily exchange rates

Select chart tabs

Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
End of day UTC
Source: CoinDesk

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

129 Comments

Up
2

In middle of one crisis, they are preparing the base for next future crisis, typical of reserve bank.

Should allow economy fundamental to run as economy cycle will run its course, manipulating and delay will only make it worse.

Up
10

Actually, they've bigger problems.

https://tomluongo.me/2022/06/17/russia-new-rules/

' Today’s “Inside Money” standard, known colloquially as the Dollar Reserve standard, is actually what I like to call “Milton Friedman’s Nightmare.” It is nothing more than a system of competitively devalued and inflated debt-based scrips running around drinking each other’s milkshakes until everyone’s glass is empty.'

' The game of nominal value of money is over, as this system does not allow to control the supply of resources. …'

This is the problem, in a nutshell. It is worth a serious read.

Up
9

PDK, comrade this propaganda is not worth the time to read it.  Channelling Audaxes this morning?

I know it makes your point, but it is simply russian propaganda.

Up
3

Getting close to the endgame

The Ponzis can only be kept alive so long, in the end they always collapse.

The idiots in power are always looking at the short term instead of long term stability, choices that ultimately are "burn it to the ground" options

Up
11

It's almost like voters were forced to let idiots run the show?

Up
8

To be fair, most voters are idiots. 

We voted in a government who disclosed zero policies to an absolute majority, only to find they did have policies sneakily hidden away, policies we don't like. 

Up
8

but they still have income ratio caps so the effect of this seems rather limited

Up
0

In one sense, they are correct - the borrowers won't run out of money with a long-term 3% interest increase at their current DTI restriction.

However, they will likely be very hungry. And they better hope rates don't rise much higher!

Up
1

"The bitcoin price has moved sideways from this time yesterday and is now at US$19,866 and up +2.4%. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been very high again at +/- 4.2%."

Fascinating highs last year. Or shall we say the peak of a ponzi. Certainly not for Mary Holmes readers.     

Up
0

It seems pretty obvious now that bitcoin is not "going to the moon". It really needs to become useful rather than just a speculative play and maybe the understanding that it's not going to 500k will help that happen. If it remains stable at around 20k USD it could perhaps start to be used for, like, transactions?

I doubt the crypto pundits here actually use it much if at all. Young people may use it to buy drugs. It can be used to make donations to demonetized and censored Internet personalities or pay ransoms but that's a limited market surely.

Up
4

Youg people may use it to buy drugs. ? 

Old people use cash.

Everything is crashing but for some reason BTC is the enemy to some?

Up
8

It's the enemy because it has fleeced a lot of people and seems kind of stupid.

Up
16

NZ house prices? BTC is not going away...so keep up the stupid comments then.

Up
8

You can live in a house, you can rent out a house, capital gains have been consistent at a modest 7% pa. The last two years have been stupid.The actual product, houses, are very useful and earn money apart from having a speculative component.

Wealth is tied to actual things like houses, minerals, energy, human labour. We need to get away from the get rich quick mentality as it turns the economy into a gamble, a lottery, where people have to take too many risks. It has reached it's apex with the scooters you see everywhere. Peak stupidity.

Up
13

Rewrite: capital gains have been a ponzi.

There, fixed it for you.

Z - please read the link I posted upthread. Gains of what?

Up
6

Property produces yields. It's not a ponzi.

Up
8

Well the yields wheels seem to be falling off now as the flow of new "ponzi: buyers drys up. I think FIAT mortgages are kind of stupid as 12 un elected people in a far away land get to set the interest rate I pay on that mortgage.

Up
4

What if you don't have a mortgage? Houses are a real thing. Ponzis are not based on real investments. I've had to explain this so many times it is quite infuriating..

Up
11

If consistent high returns delivered year after year are the test of a ponzi scheme, then that sounds a lot like residential property investment.

Sorry if you are triggered..

Up
6

About 7% per year? Some years not so good, some years better. Just a bit above inflation usually. By your criteria shares are a ponzi too.

Up
5

Yeah but I watched a 5 min clip about Bernie Madoff on YouTube.

Up
2

ikr, seems someone left the cage door open again

Up
2

Well the yields wheels seem to be falling

Yields go up when prices fall

Up
5

I agree with you Zac.   But there has been a unfortunate period were for some the business plan was capital gain.  An aberation, and fortunately reverting to normal. 

Up
3

Property only produces yields if you have another buyer (money creation).  So in that sense it is a Ponzi.  The yields are produced by more bank loans (money creation).  Sorry Zack it is a Ponzi.  Housing is consumption, not productivity.  Money creation in NZ has been geared towards consumption and speculation hence our trade deficit.  How in the hell can we have a trade deficit when we produce more than we consume.  Interesting, aka USA.

Up
2

Errr.  Property produces yields when people occupy it and pay you rent every week above and beyond your holding costs.  I didn't realize people took out mortgages to pay the rent.  

Up
2

Tulip bulb mania, created by central bank policies.  Inflation higher than interest rates will promote speculation, not production.  Where is Volcher  when you need him?

Up
1

I'm old and yes I use cash, have gold and am planning on buying some BTC to put in my wallet with my ETH.  My wallet has an on/off ramp to and from fiat money and as I make a number of overseas purchases, I believe that BTC would be a great way to hedge against the US/NZ dollar.

Up
1

What are your fees to transact in BTC or ETH?  Way too high to be useful.

Up
0

99% lower than Western Union or Paypal

Up
2

I used Wyre to get my Eth to Level 2, where fees are really cheap.  

Up
0

Bitcoin is still small and is doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing.

Up
3

bankrupting stupid people!

 

Up
14

Providing high quality financial education, most will learn a painful lesson, and that pain will mean they never forget.

Up
1

Crashing?

Up
3

I used it to buy and sell things cross-border quite a bit.

The donation to Ukraine's defense fund was certainty an interesting use case.

Up
1

Do you need blockchain for that tho? I could setup a currency with a central database hosted by Amazon cloud etc available world wide with millisecond response times and incredibly low transaction costs.  Users could be anonymous.  Is there actually a proper reason to get rid of a central database? Everything these days is in the cloud, why not money?

Up
2

No there is no reason at all but the distributed ledger architecture has a different use case.  It offers high visibility of the transactions (verifiable) and immutability of the transaction (can't be changed as the ledger is distributed).

A central database has neither of those features.

Up
3

Yes absolutely.  Because I don't trust you (sorry) and that would be tens of millions running through your system.

There is also the chance of a hack, or more likely officials shut you down as its just a centralized point of attack.  That happened to several pre-block chain digital money platforms - I forget the names - I think gold money, and something called digital reserve.

Plus I need to be able to pay you.  I imagine the bank transfer process (and your bank opening process) would be a nightmare.  

Up
0

It has a duel use then, my donation was to the Putin offense fund.

Up
1

Duel use?   Cryptocurrency of choice at 20 paces?

Up
1

It seems pretty obvious now that bitcoin is not "going to the moon". It really needs to become useful rather than just a speculative play and maybe the understanding that it's not going to 500k will help that happen. If it remains stable at around 20k USD it could perhaps start to be used for, like, transactions?

The ol' rat posion is far too early in adoption to be "stable." Long may the volatility exist. It works in your favour, even if you don't understand why. But it's relatively simple: Less of your fiat can be traded for BTC today compared to 6 months ago. That's a good thing, right? 

Up
1

The proposals received from both final counterparties during the initial selection process made it clear that large-scale production and export of green hydrogen or green ammonia in Southland is technically feasible and commercially sound, according to Meridian Energy CEO Neal Barclay.

Technically feasible, sure. Commercially sound, absolutely. But in no way is "green hydrogen" any solution to our energy or environmental issues, which is how it's being sold to the public.

Up
9

Green hydrogen is our generation's cold fusion. It's somehow going to be magically more efficient for cars than just sticking a third of the energy required to make it directly into a battery, dontchaknow. 

Up
19

But hydrogen will keep the plebs dreams of a bigger, brighter future firmly embedded in their little brains. When cold fusion is finally realised, the universe awaits.

Up
1

GV it’s not really for cars: think trucks, buses, etc. batteries are only more efficient if you ignore the massive amount of weight you have to carry around. 

Up
3

I understand that. And it works if you have a centralised depot or logistics centre, so freight, trains, boats etc. Great. But there simply isn't any getting around the inefficiency inherrent in hydrogen itself, and people who use "But hydrogen EVs are coming!" as an excuse to tear down battery EVs that already good enough for a bunch of people are the kind of people who insist self-driving technology is only 'a couple of years away' so why build mass transit. It's the tech-bro do-nothing argument that really only makes sense if you're a long-haul trucker or running a global shipping line, which most people aren't. 

Up
5

True. BMW had hydrogen 7 Series doing the rounds in the early 2000s. Nothing much seems to have happened in the interim, compared to electric cars.

Up
3

VCR vs Betamax again. Good signs both platforms will exist this time round.

Up
2

Nope both gone in the blink of a digital recording

Up
1

Is it better than burning petroleum or diesel? Because battery vehicles aren't going to work in a wide variety of fairly crucial functions. 

Up
5

Such as?   

Aviation is a maybe for small scale, probably not anytime soon for large scale, shipping is probably not viable, but neither of those run on regular diesel.

Emergency vehicles that need to work when infrastructure is borked (post earthquake etc) should probably stay fossil fuelled for a while longer, but anything on land that is operating in area with permanent infrastructure probably can go electric, and mostly should.  Its good enough for mining these days.   https://www.komatsu.co.nz/equipment/dump-trucks/electric-mining-trucks.

Up
1

A whole bunch of industrial and commercial applications that aren't able to be directly plugged into the grid. Battery technology is a far way off being practical when you increase carrying requirements.

Up
4

Linus Tech Tips crunched the numbers, a trucking Hydrogen nozzle has an "effective charging rate" (factoring in 50% loss factor) of 3.5MW (60g/s of hydrogen).  To achieve that with 800 volt battery you'd need 4400 amps.  I'm not an expert in electrical, but to give an idea the dude created a circle with his arms to illustrate the diameter of the cable you would probably need.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNgZ6xL_An4

Up
3

The problem is the amount of energy required to create the hydrogen in the first place. Once you've got it, sure, sticking it in a tank is quicker, but that's only if you're determined to overlook the huge flaws in the argument you need to overlook to get to the point where that matters. 

Up
6

Fully understand that aspect of it, which is why the 50% reduction in energy throughput.  The actual throughput at the nozzle is 7mw but the energy loss was taken off that.  

The EROI for hydrogen might be a bitter pill we need to swallow for certain applications.  Battery might not be feasible for certain heavy vehicles, and if other types of fuel are not obtainable/clean, then it'll have to be Hydrogen ICE.  If the infrastructure is set up to generate Hydrogen from renewable energy sources, you set it up, get over the idea that it's not 100% efficient and move on.  

Up
3

If you're having to decide whether that energy can be used to force-feed far more EVs far more efficiently than it can be used to create hydrogen then it's still relevant. I'm not saying hydrogen has to be 100% efficient, what I'm saying is there's no getting around the fact that it doesn't even come close to just using that power directly.

Until we have a proper electricity surplus and peak demand for EV charging is met, it's a relevant question of priority. But I think it's something we should be looking to set up now e.g. distribution points in the centre and in remote parts of the islands for long-haul users so that we can take advantage of it as soon as the time is right.

Up
5

Agreed.  But if we're going to wait until we have a proper electricity surplus, we might find that occurs when people stop driving their cars to the shops because we've kneecapped our supply chain distribution capacity by not investing soon enough in alternative fuel.  

 

Up
2

That was a good thread and you are both right.  Let's hope the Aus process (95% conversion, Hysata company) is actually achievable on a mass scale and rolled out as it would be a game changer for electrolysis. Hydrogen will still only be good for heavy applications (ships/trucks/trains/planes) where storage and production can be centralised/co-located and safe, which it can be for heavy (airports/water ports/train stations/truck refueling/mining etc). Not so much for consumer use.  Too many losses in a non centralised fuel distribution network and parked vehicle energy losses to make it feasible, compared to batteries.  But the energy density of hydrogen and the ability to deliver it quickly makes it worthwhile with high capacity and heavy load vehicles.

Up
4

Hysata, looks like a scam to me. We know the energy required to break the H2O bond and a new machine isn't going to change that.

Up
5

Hydrogen ICE?   Why on earth would you waste so much expensive hydrogen by poorly combusting it in an ICE.  If there is somewhere that trucking hydrogen in is more practical than getting electricity to the site, you'd at least use it efficiently in a fuel cell.

Up
3

You might want to look at the MCS connector, 1250V and up to 3000A.  It already exists (prototype only I think, but not that far away), cable looks to be about an inch, maybe an inch and a half in diameter.   Perhaps half-assed podcasts aren't the best place for information. Even if LTT is quite amusing at times.

https://insideevs.com/news/592360/megawatt-charging-system-mcs-launch/

Up
2

What's an inch?

Up
1

Living up to your name I see.

Up
3

Ok Boomer

Up
0

lol, not a boomer either.  Really living up to your name now.

Up
3

lol, at least someone lives up to their name, eh?

Up
0

That's pretty awesome. 

Honestly I only stumbled across it on my YouTube suggested videos, I wasn't actively trying to seek this information via "half-assed podcast".  Thought I'd share it and see what responses I receive from informed commentators such as yourself.  

Up
1

Once again, such as?

Up
0

Uh, freight, agriculture, aquaculture, contruction and trades. A large amount of the production economy that deals in physical items.

There are environmentally friendly workarounds for some of this, but they're compromise half measures.

Up
3

It’s possibly an even bigger scam than biofuels at this point. Just a nice way for the prime minister to cut ribbons with energy executives and look like they’re doing something. Note they never talk raw numbers.

The infuriating thing is that the Climate Change Commission’s report is littered with references to hydrogen and biofuels, but doesn’t mention nuclear (fission or fusion) even once. 

Up
13

Try talking raw numbers yourself.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080304100413.htm

There is a valid reason that nothing has been done in the interim (14 years).

Up
4

And what’s that reason? That we need to improve the uranium supply chain? So what? Did you even read the 14-year-old low quality article that you posted?

Fission is a proven green energy source. Unlike hydrogen and biofuels which are vapourware. It’s not the same category. Even fusion is demonstrably a more realistic prospect as a major energy source than these fuels.

Up
11

What a nonsense study. No statistical calculations for heat/energy consumption to produce uranium etc. Uranium enrichment is energy intensive, but only at the third stage which is electromagnetic diffussion, used for enriching uranium from the energy generation grade to the nuclear weapons grade.

 

I completely believe the oil/coal lobbying to over regulate nuclear power hypothesis, imposing extremely high costs for building based on fear of nuclear is the only logical explanation for why Nuclear hasn't been adopted. Also that people just assume nuclear power is an atomic weapon plugged into the grid.

Up
9

The eco-loons abhor cheap energy - they would sooner spend $700 billion on useless renewables in Germany and buy their natural gas from Russia - and fund Ukrainian war - than crank up nuclear or frack their vast gas fields. Instead today Germany Is running on lignite to keep the lights on.

"Had Germany spent $580 billion on nuclear instead of renewables, and the fossil plant upgrades and grid expansions they require, it would have had enough energy to both replace all fossil fuels and biomass in its electricity sector and replace all of the petroleum it uses for cars and light trucks."

https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/worldshalegas/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/09/11/had-they-b…

Up
10

Many folk with an actual environmental concern are very pro nuclear.

Up
9

How is this not anti competitive and subject to investigation. Two power producers are getting together to sell their power for a lower cost to remove it from the market and raise the prices for everyone else?

This transaction should be overseen by the commerce commission to ensure power is not sold to these companies for less than it would be sold to other consumers. 

Up
17

This exactly. Anything to keep Manapouri from crashing their cozy profit garuenteed market.

Up
4

The curious thing is I don't see tiwai point closing anytime soon. Perhaps this is just to strengthen their negotiating when the supply contract comes up in 2024.

I think 2023 could be the first election in decades that Rio tinto doesnt threaten to close down in order to extract some further subsidy from the taxpayer. 

Up
9

That’s because:

(A) the government finally called their bluff

(B) coal and natural gas are up so much they would be mad to exit a smelter powered by clean green hydro

(C) aluminium is important for electric cars and solar and in hot demand.

The funny thing about the smelter is that playing games seemed fun when you were the only option. Now they don’t want to muck around find out because once they give up that spot it’s gone for good. It forces a much more stable and long term approach to the relationship.

Up
6

+1 for the possible unintentional pun in (A) ;-)

Up
6

Sadly unintentional but I enjoyed your post.

Up
0

Rio Tinto should be forced to clean up the waste piles now before they carry on getting any more cheap power.

Rather than, "we'll clean up when we're finished here, pinky promise".

Up
11

Isn't the approach to sell the waste to a pretendy company to do the cleanup, only for that pretendy company to liquidate and leave it for the ratepayers and taxpayers to clean up?

Up
7

A new line of business for the vandals who get paid to deal with used car tyres you reckon?

Up
2

And to add spice, hydrogen will be used primarily in ICE applications.  Tweaks to ECU, exhaust systems etc will prolong the effective reign of ICE and avoid the spectacle of stranded assets.

And there's a simple use principle for electrification.  It can be used in applications where:

  • motive power is relatively static irrespective of load (large draglines, irrigation rigs, ferries, tugs,  fixed industrial plant),
  • loads are light and the need for much mobility is there (cars, urban deliveries, light horticulture)
  • Infrastructure for both charging and point delivery of large loads exists.  Large electric draglines use a laid-behind HT cable and transform the voltage down in the crane house.  This technique can be applied only where the source of the HT is adjacent. Charging needs careful consideration of peak loads, possibly swappable batteries for which standard pinouts and configuration are decades away, and swap stations.

Hence the hydrogen enthusiasm.  It neatly fills the gaping holes in electrification use cases: long haul trucking, most heavy agricultural machinery, isolated yet energy intense circumstances, etc.  And the ICE motive power is available and well understood.

Up
5

Goes some way to explain, doesn’t it, why a whole heap of nations,  of all denominations, are pouring $ billions into R & D to align with such an outcome.

Up
5

I'm sticking with green fossil fuels.  Plentiful, keep me warm in winter, cool in summer, get me from A to B, produce all my luxuries in life and everyone here in the USA seems to be addicted to them.  Drill baby drill.

Up
1

OMG. Hydrogen! What a huge waste of hydro electricity.

Up
17

I think the point is that it is already being wasted. Currently used to make aluminium which is such a bad use case we have to pay them to use it. 

Up
2

Wouldn't the econ-loons want to make their EV's from the lowest carbon aluminium on the planet froom Tiwai - instead of Chinese aluminium? Though given the penchant for Indo jungle coal nothing surprises.

Up
4

The world's largest white elephant.

So-called green hydrogen, is energy negative. It requires more energy to make, than it returns. The problem is that while positive energy resources remain, they can carry a loser. When they don't, we can't.

This is where economics - allied with very narrow vested interests - gets it totally wrong.

Because in a hydrogen world, money will have a negative value (all wealth requiring positive energy).

And the number of NZ journalists (claimed) going to investigate this nonsense?  Nil.

Up
17

So-called green hydrogen, is energy negative.

Last I read, humans have not worked perpetual motion out. 

Up
10

It's very, very energy negative.

Up
10

A cup of coffee is very energy negative too.  

Up
3

Hydrogen cars look to be as efficient as petrol @ 30-35%

Up
1

No energy presents itself without some cost to harness and distribute.  That cost is paid by consumers for such as propulsion or heat. There have been billionaires aplenty created along the way out of that process. For instance the coal owning aristocracy in the UK & oil barons and royalty. So if and when hydrogen becomes up for general distribution and use then the consumer will foot the bill as before. An advantage though,  it seems,  is generally accepted that atmospheric emissions are greatly less harmful than those of fossil fuels. Until people think they don’t need to go places, keep warm or cool, hard to see that the human race is not going to buy into what it always has.

Up
1

you miss (avoid?) the problem, in spades.

This is an EROEI predicament, coming up against fiat over-issuance vs energy underwrite.

Surely, by now.....?

Up
4

We don't agree on much however you & many others are right to say that hydrogen fuel generation is negative energy - a waste of resources.

Up
4

Yes the globe’s population is going to eat and power itself into oblivion, eventually. Yes they have been going  at it ever since they learnt how to light a fire. History before recorded time reveals and describes that reality and it has grown and grown hasn’t it. Read & broadcast what you like, but it ain’t going to change despite your admirable knowledge & efforts. Must  be awfully frustrating getting around every day as if Laocoon?

Up
1

Capitals at start of sentences please Foxy. We need to keep standards up for reading pleasure.

Up
1

Like  being back on the old telex. Used to do that to make a recipient have to read more slowly. Bit like talking softly to make others listen harder. But point taken, not appropriate here, have gone to edit accordingly. 

Up
3

Thank you sir, please don't let it happen again you're upsetting the manchild.  

Up
2

Much obliged Foxy, eyes are not as sharp as they used to be, however name calling will also be frowned upon. Gummy will be up soon with the topic of the day..carry on.

Up
1

... what ? ... who rattled the green hydrogen bucket  ... so , Rio wanna keep the smelter going ... well stuff them , we have better uses for that electricity  ... self sufficiency for the power to run our heavy vehicles would strengthen our industrial base ... gotta do it ... with co-governance , of course ...

Up
2

No frustration personally - some bewilderment at others, for sure.

I do what I do for my offspring, and hopefully, theirs. An easy yardstick.

Go well

Up
4

Understood. 

Up
1

I'd love to see you in the press gallery PDK. 

Yourself, Bernard Hickey and Jenee.....would be a true spectacle

 

Up
3

... everyone in that press gallery would be invisible to me ... except Jenee ...

Up
0

you and said cups undoubtedly.

Up
0

An example to help decode:

Hydrogen fuel cell EV is 38% efficient

Battery EV is 80% efficient 

 

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1bf1cbf0-ac2f-4b39-a3de-….

 

 

 

Up
5

Some of these idiots are talking Hydrogen ICE which is even lower again.  And that with and engine that is built to run hydrogen, trying to convert an existing engine to run on hydrogen is in most cases a pointless exercise.

Up
0

You shouldn't resort to Ad Hominem.  Any thoughts on the added weight of battery electric trucks and how we engineer things like bridges/roads?

Up
2

The main attraction is how "environmentally friendly" it is - but how environmentally friendly are the processes required to make the equipment store the stuff? Might work out very-long-term if the equipment is infinitely durable... but I suspect it'll be just like batteries, if not worse.

Up
1

All it takes is some sober arithmetic. The same applies to biofuels - beyond some token quantity they’re never going to scale without being a net cost. 

Up
1

Batteries are energy negative too? It takes more energy to charge than you get out. 

Up
6

"The world's largest white elephant"

What if it's a green elephant?

Up
2

Green. That’s a word that goes AWOL often enough. For instance NZ’s Green Party. On here very often we all debate carbon footprints, CO2 emissions and today simplistically fossil vs electric. Chloe, Julie Ann  and  entourage insistently promote how NZ can lift its squeaky clean international image if we all bicycle and hike everywhere for example. Yet that Green Party has raised not one iota of objection to the installation of a completely new wide bodied jet international airport on open country in Central Otago. Just how much energy, concrete/asphalt, iron/steel/metals, plastics, glass, silicone,  diesel goes into that construction and then maintenance. What is every New Zealander then going have to pay in “carbon tax” to compensate all of that? Hypocrisy abounds.

Up
7

Green in name only  , witness James Shaw swanking off to Glasgow for a climate change symposium , with 11 or 12 hangers on ... rather than Zoom his speech ... as he told the Gnats to do during Covid , when they didnt want parliament to sit unless they're actually there in person : Hypocrisy of the highest order , Greens !

Up
7

Funny isn’t it. Not really actually. On the Christchurch City Council there is one elected member known as a cycling fanatic and the attached strident message is that pursuit is of the most vital importance to combatting climate change. Yet that particular member is a signatory to the go ahead of the Tarras Airport concept. Go figure! Still if the Council cannot even raise themselves up to even  begin to build a sports stadium in downtown Christchurch, how the heck do they propose to upskill sufficiently in order to build a $billions  airport 400km distant. Go figure again.

Up
4

Been to Tarras ? ... it's no where near anything ... about 45 minute twisting road into Queenstown ... the resident hillbillies  , the Tarrasians , want us city slickers to scoot back to our highfalutin  Fendalton mansions  , and leave them be ... with their best dog Cleetus , and their half sister Pearl ... 

Up
1

Conflict of interest? Director tied to Kiwibank contracts to RBNZ

Well well well, what do we have here...

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/conflict-of-interest-director-tied-…

Free article: https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/129030675/criticism-after-reserve-bank-b…

Up
6

What's the expected energy output of the planned $5 billion hydrogen Station?

Up
0

Lessons for National from the Australian Power Crisis

"There are three key points to take away from the recent power debacle in Australia.

First, take a look at this graph of indexed electricity prices in Aussie from 1955 to 2017. After decades of steady reduction the rise in price has been steep and unrelenting since the start of the age of unreliable power in the mid-2000’s.

Remember this every time some Green tells you that Wind and Solar are cheaper than traditional base load, utility-scale power sources; “cost” is about more than just the Capex of the equipment. It’s about the cost of power shortages, limited growth, potential grid collapses, shorter plant lifetimes (25 years), and the cost of maintaining reliable backup power sources.

Second, note that the Liberal-National’s have been in government during much of this time, including the last nine years just ended. So when Labor and the Left hold them responsible for much of this nonsense they will be correct.

Third, hidden by such truth is the fact that Labor and the Greens wanted to go harder and faster on all this, which may have been a better idea since the crash would have come harder and faster, with appropriate lessons learned.

Best of all it should be noted that this is all a complete waste of time and money."

https://nominister.wordpress.com/2022/06/20/lessons-for-national-from-t…

Up
3

Clarke and Dawe - The Energy Market Explained - YouTube

as relevant today as it was 5 years ago

 

Up
1

"Gold is down" but hardly a greasy fingerprint of a price tarnish against a background of blood in the crypto streets.

Truly a sanctuary amidst the market volitility of late.

 

Up
0

Bring back the 7% rates commenter. 

Up
0

How many of our homeless can this project house?

Up
0