SFO investigating Bullion Buyers as customers report money missing; Greeks fail to do debt deal as paper work missing; Germans post record exports
Here's my summary of the key news overnight in 90 seconds at 9 am in association with Bank of New Zealand, including a report from the NZ Herald that the Serious Fraud Office is investigating complaints from customers of high profile firm BullionBuyer.co.nz that they cannot retrieve money invested with the precious metals broker.
The NZ Herald reported a customer, John Fraser, had invested NZ$340,000 through the brokerage and now could not retrieve the money. BullionBuyer has advertised aggressively on television and radio and is owned by Grace Holdings, which is in turn owned by Cook Islands-born accountant Robert Kairua.
NZ Herald reports that Kairua told Fraser the money could not be retrieved because a former trader for the firm, Gus Elijah Geldman, had moved the money. Geldman, a preacher based in Florida, resigned last September after the NZ Herald reported he had been charged with fraud in America.
Meanwhile, there was yet again no deal announced overnight by Greek politicians to agree a new austerity plan, that includes big cuts in the minimum wage, public sector pensions and a crackdown on tax evasion. The politicians cited a lack of paperwork in their decision to delay consensus talks again.
US stocks, European stocks and the New Zealand dollar were steady in morning trade with investors watching the Greek situation warily.
Markets have been calmed in recent months by waves of money printing by central banks desperate to keep Northern Hemisphere banking systems liquid.
Elsewhere in Europe, Germany reported record growth in exports in 2011 as its manufacturers take advantage of a weak euro and their moves in previous years to reduce unit labour costs.
Germany has benefited from the turmoil in Europe and many economists argue its inclusion within the euro has allowed it to have a weaker currency than would otherwise be the case.
This export growth is also cited as a reason why Germany needs to keep bailing out its southern neighbours in the euro zone, to ensure it can use a weak euro to boost its export sector.
No chart with that title exists.
95 Comments
Errrr ummmm were we not pointing out very loudly during all of 2011 and back thru 2010 and 2009 that the only way to invest in gold was to hold the ingots and better yet the coin?...What part of that discussion did Fraser not understand...watch now as the money disappears...poof.
Yes Wolly - you are right - but in the case of MF Global clients and any one else that wishes to leverage the ownership of an asset, one signs the right to retrieval away in the Customer Agreement.- that is when trading in the US & UK - which is mandatory when dealing in leveraged derivative products in retail size.
Ever read his book "Wheres the Gold"? He outlines the background to the collapse and if you can take his word for it, and he does seem plausable, then the BNZ got it. Ray got bugger all but a lot of aggravation, but I bet with his skills he is doing well for himself again.
With respect to the type of exposure to precious metals one should have;
Re Germans post record exports the BBC item reports annualised numbers and doesn't reveal the fact that German exports for the month of December 2011 dropped 4.3% relative to the same month 2010. This sobering result is interpreted as meaning that the eurocrisis is now affecting Germany where the economic outlook is deteriorating rapidly.
Power prices rising:
Mercury Energy Announces Electricity Price Increase
Electricity prices will rise by an average of 5.8% for Mercury Energy’s residential customers from 1 April 2012.
The price change includes an increase in the charges passed through to customers by Mercury Energy from the local lines company, which account for around 40% of a customer’s bill and support the maintenance of lines and transmission infrastructure. This year’s lines increase of an average of 3.7% on a customer’s total bill reflects a significant rise in transmission charges from Transpower. These charges support major investment in New Zealand’s National Electricity Grid, improving grid security. Prices and revenues for transmission and for most lines companies are regulated under the Commerce Act, and the Commerce Commission approves maximum prices and revenues for them.
The remaining portion, about 60% of a customer’s bill, comprises of the energy charge, which Mercury Energy determines. The energy price rise represents, on average, an increase of 2.1% on a customer’s total bill.
Mercury Energy’s General Manager James Munro said “investment in electricity infrastructure is essential if New Zealand homes and businesses are to have a secure supply of energy as the economy and population grow, and this has been recognised by the Commerce Commission.
“Some good examples of this investment are the progress on the North Island Grid Upgrade project and the expansion of the HVDC inter-island link. Both of these projects strengthen grid capacity and enable the generation projects in geothermal and wind that are growing New Zealand’s renewable energy base, supporting customer demand.”
Mercury Energy will not be reviewing its standard residential electricity prices again before April 2013.
ENDS
Note to editors:
· Average price changes do not include price changes for customers in Nelson or Selwyn Heights. Mercury Energy has not yet received confirmed 2012 lines charges for customers in these areas.
· The lines increase for customers in Christchurch includes the pass-through of the April 2011 lines price increase, which Mercury Energy has absorbed over the past year.
· With respect to customers in Christchurch, Mercury Energy would not usually review its prices again until April 2013. The company will follow this standard process unless an additional lines price increase is implemented to support the major investment required to repair lines infrastructure in Christchurch. Any such additional increase by the local lines company would require regulatory approval.
· The table below sets out the average energy and lines price rises for residential customers in regions across New Zealand.
Region
Average energy increase (on total bill)
Average lines increase
(on total bill)
Average overall increase
Auckland
2.1%
3.8%
5.9%
Hamilton
2.0%
3.2%
5.2%
Taupo
2.1%
4.0%
6.1%
Rotorua
2.2%
4.3%
6.5%
Palmerston North
2.1%
3.2%
5.3%
Wellington
2.1%
2.7%
4.8%
Christchurch
2.4%
4.1%
6.5%
Dunedin
2.4%
2.6%
5.0%
Some of us here have long predicted power prices rising increasingly ahead of incomes, and have explained at length, why this will be so. CEO's incomes - while deplorable - are not a significant factor.
The Greens - the old guard at least - understood that educating joe public about the Hubbert Curve, wasn't going to work, but that appealing to the hip-pocked (power savings) just might. Given that efficiencies - insulation, double glazing, solar orientation, solar water heating - also 'save money', they were a good thing to push. You didn't have to educate the mob, just herd it in the right direction.
In an energy-constrained world, what did folk expect? Cheaper energy?
Just so PDK. Anyway whos worried about power bill increases? Our 3kW solar PV grid tie system combined with a solar hot water system meant we gave up paying any electric bills last year.
You can now get a 3kW system pv system installed for under $14K. Think of that price next time you are looking for that 'must have' car upgrade etc. Then think of the fact that electricity prices doubled in the past 10 years - and will no doubt do so again.
Yes I realise it can be done cheaper, but not eyerybody can DIY,chuckle!
Look at this way: $14k placed in the bank at one year deposit gets you maybe $500 interest per annum after tax of say 20%.
A 3kW PV grid tie system in a sunny place like Nelson generates $1100-1200 per annum electricity savings now. In ten years time that will likely be well over $2000/annum.
Thats the simplest analysis - you can cut it all sorts of other ways. Its that sort of analysis this site should be looking at - never mind much of the fluff thats started to appear here.
Without the $14K to hand and not lucky enough to live in sunny Nelson we'd be looking at a large loan with smaller benefit. Realistically it would be well over 20 years to break even. The chances of us being in the current house in 20+ years time are pretty much zero and, due to the average kiwi's ignorance of the issue, there is little value added to the sale price so it just doesn't make sense for us. I wish it did.
Really? You must live in Invercargill.......
Here are the average sunshine hours in New Zealand:
http://www.emigratenz.org/NewZealandSunshine.html
Well over 50% of the population live in areas receiving 2000 hours plus of sunshine, ie within 82% of the sunshine hours of what Nelson gets.
A $14K 3 kW grid tie system (on a North facing roof) saving someone $1100/year in Nelson in 2011/2012 will pay for its initial capital outlay in 10 years allowing for a cumulative rate of increase in the electricity price of 5% per annum (by year 10 the annual saving will be $1800/annum). At 7% per annum (the last 10 years have been closer to this rate) it pays for itself in 9 years.
The pay back time in places as diverse as CChurch, Wellington and Auckland would therefor likely be of the order of 14 years or less.
Whilst I appreciate that not everyone has $14k sitting around, there are a fair number that do - and when you compare the economics of having that cash in a deposit account versus what it can save you via a PV system.......
I agree with your figures but I just don't think it reflects the situation for a large number of New Zealanders. Your 14 year figure seems reasonable... if you have the cash. For the rest of us the interest on a $14K loan would push that out to 20 years. That still would make it worthwhile if you were staying put but for most that is not the case, particularly younger people who are necessarily more mobile. For a 20 or 30-something to assume they will live in the same house for that long is a big gamble. Especially with the world economy in the toilet.
I know it should be the best option but it just doesn't make sense for us or many like us. If PDK is interested in taking some DIY classes it might make more sense!!
Apply some lateral thinking to that, which is what I'd do if I were young now.
Set up a camper, caravan, boat (a trailer yacht can be used as a caravan) or shipping-container, as your base. That way your infrastructure goes with you. Set it up off-grid, low voltage, self-contained, end story. Live in it if you get land, or on someone else's. I have an architect friend who works out of a container (fold-out verandah and french doors) and friends who live in two.
I teach that stuff for free. Drop by some time, stay and learn. :) Just showed a French couple around not an hour ago; pelton is the same word in French, apparently.
Perhaps you were better at reading a circuit diagram than conversing in English. Go back and check the 82% figure - it relates to percentage insolation relative to Nelson, not population.
But heck, go read iconoclast's comment below, 190W panels at $450. Guess he's bulling you too eh pal?
'thanks for being so nice as to point it out'
No worries mist, no need to thank me - I am so pleased for you, its fantastic to admit your failings - good for you. Not only that, but I actually made you get off your backside and do some up to date research on solar systems rather than rely on some hopelessly obsolete figures.
What a rewarding day!
Sorry, but I met with a North Shore wholesaler 2 months ago and was quoted $450 per panel for 190w Suntech Panels, we were seeking a couple of <100w panels for an industrial job, but can get the $450 panels if we want them. You just gotta try a little harder. From that you can work out the mark up your reseller is asking.
Shhhh man! Leave mistwhatever to daydream his $20K 2kW systems in peace! He/she dont want you coming here with this sort of info......
3-5y decline rates? WTF are you talking about mist? Decent panels come with a 25 year warranty ie that they will still be working at 80% efficiency after 25 years. The drop in efficiency after 3-5 years is a few percent at most.
But hell feel free to work on assumptions that are out of date because 'you cant be bothered'.
Oh please Mr Mist, please dont have me booted off this forum, oh my, I don't know how ever I could survive........
Such a shame your extensive research on solar panel user forums cant seem to direct you to systems costing less than $20K for 2kW eh? You must have delved really deeply into the area.......
You want cheap power? Really? Or clean power? Or a mix? With the debate on global warming still relevant what is it that New Zelaanders want.
BEST OPTION - OLD EFFICIENT (BUT DIRTY) POWER PLANTS
With today's technology "cheap" power is polluting energy - either coal or gas fired - or very risky in an earthquake prone country - nuclear. Apparently - "the public" do not want these sorts of investments as it contributes to global warming.
MIDDLE OPTION - GREEN TECHNOLOGY - SPREAD AROUND COUNTRY
Green energy is significantly more expensive to produce, but if the population decides to be choosy about energy production this is a lower footprint on the planet. It's cleaner energy at a higher cost.
But by building multiple sites, and placing them close to regions and cities that create a huge power draw - New Zealand could change it's power profile over 2-3 decades.
That means that New Zealand surely will be investing in "green" technologies, such as wind, hydro, geo-thermal and solar power stations - right? Not as such - We have seen plenty of opposition to proposed power projects that had planned on using windmills or hydro dams - and effective solar or tidal power in NZ climates is still pie-n-the-sky.
WORST OPTION - STATUS QUO
A small number of aging power plants - that require vast distribution power pylons that wast as much as 50% of power being generated in transmission and that is prone to single point of failure.
This of course results in power scarcity, outages, and cartels of generation and distribution. It gives us what we have today.
SUMMARY :
New Zealand has a population of 4.3 million people - and they are surviving and using infrastructure that was designed to support 3.0 maybe 3.5 million people. The top-heavy demand for power - 50% north of Taupo means that much of our energy is lost through transmission lines.
Power is relatively scarce - New Zealand needs to invest in power generation - be it coal fired, or hydro, or wind - I don't really care because I am in the fortunate position of being able to afford to pay my power bill ... but the debate over cheap power / green power / any bloody power needs to be had - and then legislation create to enable them to be built with less fuss.
Given the timescales required to complete these projects we need to be planning and implementing gerenation project NOW in order to provide for 2020 and beyond.
PJK - I may be doing you a disservice, but why 'complete these projects'?
Surely we look at efficiencies first? If every house used what mine does, we'd all get by on one Benmore penstock, idling. Leaves a lot of power already being made 'sustainably' (at least it's hydro and it's existing) over - indeed, enough to perhaps power some vehicular options.
You are right in stating that local is best - transmission is always loss-inducing. Local doesn't have to be a wind-farm, though. It can be as per AndyH's - right at home. The grid becomes an equaliser - much less load. The lakes are the batteries.
No need for 'generation projects', but it would be good if Govt anticipated the need, as 'market forces' are always too late for this kind of driver, and it'll be a compound squeeze anyway. You are correct in the 'now' and the 'for 2020 and beyond'.
Distributed systems are very good - but I thought that we were living in real world New Zealand rather than discussion a utopian solution.
;-)
Many New Zealanders rent their homes, many more are living in apartment blocks in the cities, and another huge swath of the population does not have $10K or $12K to spend. These people need access to "public power".
I'd love to move to some sort of distributed power system - but frankly don't know where to even start in my region as there seems to be very little professional business offering it and local builders have no real idea what it entails ... (and I lack the skills to self install)
Have you got any useful net resources for Kiwi's to look at?
Utopian can be real - you just legislate.
What most folk miss, is the disconnect between genre. For instance, the best thing most people/landlords can do, is solar hot-water. It's not direct electricity, but it's the biggest single saver of same.
Even enthusiasts get that wrong sometimes - for instance you get people waxing lyrical about pedalling a generator to power a washing-machine (which is entirely feasible, of course). What they don't factor in, is that the electric part of that scenario is nothing more than a transmission-loss. Far better to pedal the washing-machine direct.
Try googling 'home energy systems diy' and 'nz pages'. enjoy.
Let me see now - one opportunity is better health, but that's not a cost, it's a bonus. No amount of wealth displaces being dead.
Lack of the need to work to earn to pay the power bill would be another.
Lack of the need to work to buy a plannedly-obsolescent w/m every few years would be another.
All sounds like savings, rather than displaced 'costs'.
If we factored things in correctly (health costs throught lack of exercise through using grid energy to wash your clothes, which in turn needs to factor in the finite fuel that drove the truck which supplied the concrete for the dam) we'd see 'costs' differently. Even displaced 'opportunity' ones.
Because energy was extremely cheap, components getting so and ppls leasure minimal.. My grandmother spend monday's washing....it took all day and she had a power tub and a powered ringer (Oh god it was hell)....these days ppl walk up with a handful of clothes and come back in 30 mins or so and put them in a dryer.....(I use a line and refuse to buy a dryer) Im fairly unique Im told...in that respect.....all are contempories simply watse engery and dont benefit from teh sun killing bugs....so the use chemicals....and additives etc etc.
All uses energy....mostly oil....
Its going to change...
Robby by number - energy availability was one, failure to anticipate consequences another. Nobody anticipates the peak supply of something they're just starting to hack into.
Wilbur Wright was a lateral-thinking genius, in my book, but he is not recorded as worrying that airlines 100 years on, would fall out of the sky due to fuel scarcity/competition/triage.
Here's a clip from it.
Mist - several errors there, simultaneously.
You failed to ascertain what money is, and what in particular, $120 is. And whether it can continue to be underwritten, and whether you can expect it in return for 'time'. Then you failed to ascertain the concurrency of the problem that pulls the rug from the currency - the energy itself, or rather, the lack of it. You further presume (without peer revier nor reference nor proof) that your personal time-use will remain as it is. Further again, you assume a 'copmany' will continue as a system, when energy reduction absolutely says their will be an reduction and eventual end to interest, dividends and profits.
Too hung up on economics, you are. In for a wee shock you will be being.
Sorry, I know it sounds incredible, but please just spare a little of your valuable time, and read 'The Upside Of Down' too. Nothing like thinking, and being informed.
People often overlook the power of distributed systems. The internet being a good example. Once upon a time there was "Big-Oil" now there is "Big-Power". Four years ago the Australian Federal Government introduced a subsidy of $8000 to encourage home-owners to install $12000 1kw grid-tied solar systems. It was a no-brainer. It was so successful everyone who could see the advantages in an environment where power prices were only going north by 20% per annum got on board. "Big-Power" has successfully lobbied the government to shut the scheme down because a distributed system is too successful and diminishes the need for ever increasing expenditure by the big-power monopoly on infrastrucure capacity expansion etc etc etc .. I could go on ...
Which is cheaper to build for NZ? 8000 individual pv systems with new power lines to cope or a plant to power 8000 houses with the transmission in place? answer is not the former.
Scale usually has economy....usually around 0.7 to 0.8....what costs when you do small scale is the infrastructure to take it off the house. Canada (Onterio?) was doing this and their grid couldnt cope....yet the householder didnt contrbute to that cost, just made the expense necessary and in fact was taking a huge profit mandated on the power companies by Govn....so a double whammy, no wonder its not wanted.
regards
Power prices were going north 20%p/a in part because of the cost blowout with the solar subsidy schemes.
That scheme was an unethical transfer of wealth from low income people who couldn't afford solar PV systems to those wealthier individuals who could take advantage of the subsidy (paid for by said low income people through their power bills)
Got absolutely nothing to do with Big Power lobbying.
Robby: Almost right. The $8000 initial subsidy was federal and was means tested. The bit you are talking about is the Feed-in-Tariff which sure is a transfer from the less-well-to-do without a system to the wealthy who had to pay full freight. The Federal Govt had dropped that back dramatically to about $3000 currently and the Feed-In-Tariff in NSW has been cut from 66 cents k/wh to 29 cents k/wh in parity with the draw-down-from-grid rate because the Power Companies were having to foot the bill "so they said" but it was supposed to be paid for by the state govt. And yet Wind-Farms and Solar-Farms (Big-Power) are continuing to receive BIG subsidies and incentives while the little guy's home PV opportunities are gone.
The "best option" is only viable in cost terms today...the big issue is the timescale to build these and where their fuel input costs will be in 5 years and 30 beyond. the answer is its not viable.
"public dont want it" Well thats possibly true but have a look at what the NZ energy companies are putting in....wind and geo-thermal... Wind and geo are not substantially, but some %... more expensive and given the future, wind will be cheap inside 5 years. This is a fraction of the life of the plant, and the power companies can see this I think.
In fact I think a US company is doing a commercial geo-thermal venture with North Island Maori so a purely private deal must be cost effective....or they wouldnt do it....
Jerry Brownlee I think tried to push the SOE's into Ngas plants, well we know he's thick....and they didnt go there....maybe look at the commercial reasons why..
So your "substantially" is conjecture / doubtful.
Tidal, there is the cook straight, very dooable, one of the few places in the world to be so.
50% loss in transmission? rubbish, URL? all the data Ive seen says 4%....
"NOW" totally agree....but because of Peak Oil....should have been 5 or 10 years ago....
regards
Mist - it went wrong because the speaker was confusing what underwrote what.
No money was ever 'made', without energy being expended.
You can, however, expend energy without money being involved. All but one species, on this planet, do so for starters.
If you understand that, you can set up an energy-efficient system (house) which, unsurprisingly, is 'cheap' to run. Most folk completely fail to factor in the widening gap between incomes and energy-availability, they get hung up on the $, not it's watt-purchasing power.
Well its going to get worse....a lot worse and enough ppl have been warning of this for years.....40cents a kwh is coming. ie double your present cost....probably inside 5 years, certainly 10 and 80cents a kwh by the end of the decade doesnt seem improbable.
This is because of peak oil, and we only produce 65% of our power needs from re-newables, so the only way to ration is cost.
Apart from that you make some fundimental errors, the biggest is NZ's energy prices will rise but the rest of the world's will not., this will not be the case....hang on for $3 and $4 a litre petrol if you can get it as well.....and your grocery bill doubling.......
Kids, well the generations before squandered the cheap energy, and didt plan for the future, so blame yourself....they sure will.
Otherwise, short term, well the short answer is consider moving, meridian were trying to sell me 2 years with no increases in December.......give them a call or visit the various websites and get some deals.
regards
Peak Oil ? Really? Steven - your Oil worries are not relevant here - you've got to change the tune for different discussions. Oil produces around 156MW of New Zealand's 9667 MW total ... the issue IS NOT PEAK OIL.
(Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_New_Zealand )
We've got plenty of high quality gas and coal that could power the country for centuries - we have hydro resources that could be used - but we haven't built a hydro plany since 1993.
Power demands rise by between 1%-2% per year, and generating capacity needs to be planned to match.
You are ignoring the total picture....and time and scale...
Peak oil is highly relevent when you consider the total energy mix and how it will change....for instance yes we have coal, but when ppl want to convert it to synth-diesel what happens to the price into the power station(s)? its going to rocket.....ditto N gas.
The good coal is also committed to be sent over to india....what is left is the lignite and thats really the poorest quality, yet they are looking at using it for fertilizer....I think at present but synth-diesel/petroll is also quite doable...
Also while we may have enough gas (and thats questionable) the rest of the world does not so being on international markets we will have to compete on price....and this will apply to lignite and its outputs of synth-fuels and fertilizer.
Hydro, sure there are some areas that are economic to do hydro on....the problem will be RMA/Nimbies and time....dams take concrete which is energy intensive...so the cost to build will rise....however the number of river spots left that are worth daming are not huge.....
Geo has more potential for growth needs and tide.
planning....well that 2% is just business as usual...when ppl start to migrate to EVs for instance the water use is going to increase.....and we are already short-ish in dry years.....
Power and plenty for centuries....even if I accept that there is enough coal for NZ's needs for centuries, we would have to stop shipping it overseas. Instead the demand from overseas will go up as peak coal is reached and demand from an increasing population also goes up.......so in reality that timescale will shrink....and the costs rise....
If you think this wont feed into electrical power prices you are way off the mark.
regards
PJK - with respect, bollocks.
You aren't another poster in drag, are you? Sound awfully like a wee muppet we had here recently....
Sorry, but you exponential growth s unsustainable. Even 'teeny-weeny mot-very-much-at-all, indeed-hardly-any' exponential growth is not sustainable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth
Your comments mirror those of the NZED of old - 2% growth projected forever, whereupon they threw up their hands and hollered 'Nuclear'. Failing, of course, to run that finite resource past the exponential thing, too. As do you with your coal/gas comments. And you're wrong in your comment to Steven - oil depletion will indeed see displacement from any other energy source even remotely capable of substitution - however inefficiently.
Time to plan and execute a steady-state economy, while we still can. I'll be increasingly difficult to hold what we have, let alone build and maintain an increase.
I don't wear drag mate - T-shirt and shorts ... apologies for remining you of a muppet ... but the ideas I post (flawed though you might find them) are all my own
:-)
Regarding 1-2% growth - that a simple population thing - I grew up knowing there were 3 million kiwis now there are 4.3 million. I see no steady state economy in New Zealand (or Australia) in the foreseeable future as the rest of the world likes what they see down under.
And as for Peak Oil - it will affect a lot of things (although I think it will be slower to show up than youself and Steven obviously) - but it DOES NOT affect New Zealand's power generation capacity significantly.
"no steady state" not possible with how our economy/financial system works, it grows or shrinks. So indeed our economy will start to shrink as fuel costs and even shortages bite business..Sure the rest of the world might like the look of NZ but at some stage we will be closing our doors when its becomes blindlingly obvious that we cant sustain growth.....
Peak oil was 2006...its now history and the time line to put in replacements is 10~20 years...so we are already 5 years too late....it will hurt a lot.
I have already explained why I think it will make a huge difference.
regards
Acually if you follow OMG's and my thread it looks like demand is static or even dropping due to the recession....
But you are right, its a very good Q just why prices are rising.....so the inputs have to be looked at.....and the overall outputs....so lets start there (outputs) are profits and dividends noticably up? who benefits? the Govn has said to the SOE's (I believe) that they have to give an un-realistic (to me) return.....so if some of the price rises are that you can lay some of that blame at the National led Govn...and of course such costs are a recessive tax....ie the poor pay more....plus more GST....nice for the Govn. Next, is new plant, both natioanl grid and generation....all this takes capital and financing, and the plant attarcts more GST, oh look spending millions, but a bigger return for the Govn as GST is higher.
Such plant was delayed by Labour so now its catch up so we pay for it...so part of the blame is yet again the Government...this time Labour, they didnt invest....too busy spending on social engineering. So a-hole 1 or a-hole 2.....
Computer gear at 5 years old has to be replaced, its at the end of its warrantee.. We have a 5 year hardware refresh cycle......its going to 6 or 7 because we virtualise so the warrantee is the life of tehe support of the operating system not hardware, so OS support is 7 to 10 years...In saying that we now virtualise so 5 years ago a hardware server cost $8k minimum, now with time sharing and virtualisation its $1500~ $2k....
database costs, are ok but its the middleware and consultants cost for it thats hurting and IT projects costs are actually through the roof.....for us anyway. Oracle and indeed any vendor is charging like a wounded bull....so we are actually doing more and more open source stuff like moving to mysql where we can....to cut costs and improve delivery (funny that) I am actually doing a Identity / login / LDAP solution for some weeks work and free software where Oracle's costs were > $100k....and significant ongoing costs are also avoided...
Shares, well Contact for one is seeing their price drop....glad I bailed when I did...
"Systems have been 8><--- redundantised" this is an overhead so costs more...usually it means backup plant ahrdly used.
regards
Oh thats okay then... thanks for pointing that out skudiv... whew... I actually thought for a moment my power bill would be going up for a moment.... must have been just an emotional reaction on my part... should read it more carefully next time then.... as you were then...
The smelter has a long term contract of supply and renegotiates price more regularly....that's what the Manapouri power station is for I believe....
I presume NZ is making money of the deal - at least thats what they told me when I went though it a few months ago...
i wasnt aware this was the case, essentailly I think they are NZ's biggest consumer. and draw huge amounts..Also they do regulary say they will build a coal fired plant if "NZ" tries to charge them too much.....they pay a few cents a kwh (<3.5cents?) while we pay 20cents.....
any URLs?
regards
Inflation as in overall inflation........so some things rise, but so with no more wages other things have to drop, no one is buying whiteware....I just got $600 knocked off a $2600 fridge, a 25% discount....
and with a recession ppl are using less, so the bill sees a % increase softened by not using as much.
....and due to the in-efficieny of such a re-distribution the net effect is worse...hence why we see no overall rise in core inflation its still 2%.....hence why buying gold as an infaltioanry hedge when there is no inflation in sight makes no sense...for other reasons, sure....
regards
I reckon the issue is peak power. Our entire system is geared to deliver enough grunt at the peak demand times ie 6-7pm 7-9am. I still have not seen "products" from the energy suppliers that discount your bill if you either avoid or mitigate during these times.ie
Product 1. I will limit my usuage during peak hours to X kwhrs
Product 2. I will install smart metering devices that will control my usage.
Product 3. I will install smart cooking technology that will control my usage.
etc etc etc. There is a HUGE gap in the market place for this. The industrial sector have some incentives as they are charged for their entire year on peak usage, so they limit their usage during peak demand.
Why not products for the domestic users??
@ Gerry Brownlee and Bob Parker, the source of your frustrations is about how to fund the rebuild of Christchurch - please see the article the link below:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/5260027/Housing-on-the-state
It describes how reserve bank credit was used to fund NZ's state housing project in the 1930's. It is similar to the mechanism used for 'quantitative easing', but instead of reserve bank credit buying bonds from financially distressed banks to replenish their balance sheets and reserves, we could use the same sort of approach to rebuild the public infrastructure of Christchurch. This need not be inflationary as the money supplied would be matched by the requisite productivity to replace what has been lost. Indeed inflation of the money supply would be less than if we continued to borrow from the wholesale markets at higher interest rates. Objections to such an approach are usually based on fears of hyperinflation related to 'make work projects', 'bridges to nowhere' and irresponsible 'money printing' without matching productivity. However, replacing what has been lost and required while matching productivity does not cause inflation, as NZ found with the NZ state housing project. According to the article you have already dismissed such an approach, probably because of the commonly held inflation fears I mention above. However, I wonder if at this stage with costs and frustration escalating and likely to threaten scope and progress of the rebuild, it would be timely to reconsider this suggestion, more rigorously, and take advantage of this funding approach? Cheers, Les. www.changenz.co.nzExactly but its too kind to say JKs government has dismissed the idea based on inflation fears - bollocks. They've dismissed it based on it being philosophically at odds with their neoliberal ideology. Better in their minds to sell assets and increase taxes - which was (I believe) what started the whole "clown" stoush... JK's government are not looking for any alternates - and BP told them well, if that's your solution, then you send give the command.
Kate - I think you are correct, popularity is important for politcians. Shame this option is not being considered, perhaps we should rename ChCh, "Failed Investment Finco Bank Ltd " and see if we could get some QE from somewhere? Seems to work for said entities that have suffered disaster, albeit of their own making. As for the 'hyperinflation' fear:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/05/mmt-fear-of-hyperinflation.html#Archives
I often think I'm "too kind." Cheers, Les.
I spent some time last year with a senior VP from Cisco who is concnetrating on the utiltiy industries. He said that the major issue for the power industries is the engineering culture that pervades the industry which based on 1960's technology and we see this with Transpower (woeful investment decisions) and also the decisions made re smart meters by the retailers and lines companies. I'm looking at my smart meter and wondering whether it will ever help me as a consumer - I really don't think it will.
If you look at the power industry it still looks like a mainframe - we've a long way to go to get a smart internet style distribution system and till we do local power production will never scale.
No this is an issue for Cisco not the power companies....engineering is being done? excellent....it might survive stupidity and greed.....
and PLCs are often 86 based....same as PCs....funny that....but of course they are highly reliable, and very cheap....the latter is not Cisco's model....not in teems of you buying off them anyway.
Besides which its the wrong end of the stick or power cable, the smart meter can be Internet controlled, what's needed is something for it to control and thatst also cheap to do...oh wait not ciscos model either.......
As an example......so at 5pm say the meter tells the fridge via wifi to drop its temperature by so much (say 0.5DegC from -3DegC) depending on the ambient temp, knowing that at 6pm its off for 3 hours....and the losses are such that by 9pm with the peak gone its slightly above ideal say -2.5DegC so then the fridge runs to get back...Or on advert breaks turn off the fridge for 5mins while the kettles boil....its easy in programming and very cheap to do in commodity chips and goods.....cisco and its over-priced kit isnt needed at all and not at the plant...
regards
Wasn't a plug for Cisco - he does understand the problems of the global industry though. Would love to know how my smart meter will do what you say - your tech dreams are as far away from the current (ha!) world we have been placedin by the utlity companies as a far away thing!
Smart meters - yeah right!
The smart meter is a small cpu on a card
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zilog_Z80
or something similar....right now its taking your current and voltage has an internal timer and is calculating the wattage.....and saving it and/or transmitting it.
NB I think there was an argument that the so called smart meters being put in NZ had been neutered ie didnt have control capability....all to save a few cents...
here it is...
http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/1802226/critics-slam-new-zealands-…
Ive worked on these things 15 years ago.....you have inputs, outputs and software logic which you program via at the time from a PC using 1200baud serial lines.....1gb ethernet is now easy, cheap and everywhere...for a house a wifi is easy and costs cents per device...........its all trivial stuff. I mean the ones I used were ZX81 CPU driven you dont need much processing power at all........I still have a logic card that plugged into a PC's ISA bus and had the baud serial channels out, shielded twin and earth cabling 300m between devices or a booster........the PLC itself was $1000 however so I didnt get one of those....but would have controlled 10~12 devices....6 digital on/off and 6 analouge....
So how would you control it? well via a ipad or PC type device even a smart phone....to upload changes to the smart meter and variable changes. So you buy a fridge, you download a software module from the Internet and upload it to the meter, via wifi. Tthe Power company can then control it, or youcan via the PC........honestly the hardware is now extremely cheap...bluetooth or wifi means no wiring which is one of the other big costs ie installation time....I just got a new fridge in December, it has a digital LED screen and "intelligence"....it manages the door opening times etc....all it would need to be externally controlled is a simple signal over wifi....the wifi chips would probably add $1 to the fridge when made....trivial...
The problem is we have got used to energy being so cheap it made no sense to conserve it...that is now changing, the trouble is that takes a lead time eg I wouldnt be replacing my fridge for 15 odd years now.
regards
Toss into the mix the fact that electricity use is continuing to decline and the proposed price increases and likely sluggish or poor economic conditions will reinforce that decline. The problem with alternatives like wind farms is their intermittency and maintenance costs - which will be passed on to consumers. They produce next to nothing during winter evening peaks. Meridian has walked away from its Central Otago wind farm on the Lammermore and it wouldn't surprise me if other SOE's do too. Geothermal still has a lot of potential, along with micro-hydro (especially useful for for dairy farmers who have big electricity bills). Consumers who double glaze and insulate properly will definitely benefit. The latest appliances are using less and less energy - the next generation of fridges are said to use 25% less electricity, now multiply that across the nation!
The url I provided, which you seem to have missed, is to current usage and it is compared to 2011, which in turn was, apart from the winter spike when the country experienced snow not seen in places for a generation, lower than 2010.
Can you provide an url to show 2 to 4% annual growth? Furthermore how could this possibly occur when people are leaving NZ and when you are regularly predicting financial armageddon?
Electricity use is one thing we can cut back on when times are tight, even if only a little. A penny saved is a penny earned as they say.
As the SOE's go on the auction block I doubt the govt wants it known that electricity use at this time is going nowhere, for obvious reasons.
That graph just shows spot demand...there is no yearly trends I can see, none at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_New_Zealand ~ suggests an annual increase of 2.1%...
http://www.systemoperator.co.nz/demand-status ~ 1.5 to 2% in the opening background paragraph
Parliment (a bit old) , 2% per annum. ~ http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/A7E4C7AE-DB6C-4179-9054-0DE9E3B55…
http://www.nzares.org.nz/pdf/The%20Future%20of%20Electricity%20Generati… ~150mw more needed every year
So I dont know where you get your data from but it looks very wrong.
regards
A friend well connected to one of the electricity SOE's was told by a very senior figure that demand had dried up and that this would last for at least 5 years meaning construction of new generating plant was not warranted.
I found this link. Interesting isn't it that at the time this particular SOE is up for sale, nothing is being said about future demand growth as I believe it would harm its value in the marketplace. What exactly is the second bolded statement based on then other than "optimism"??
The Turitea wind farm is unlikely to be built for at least four years.
Mighty River Power was granted consent for the 60-turbine development in the Palmerston North City Council-owned Turitea Reserve last month, after applying for a larger 131-turbine farm in 2008.
Lack of growth in demand for electricity over the past three years had pushed back by several years the economic viability of the $150 million project, MRP general manager for development Mark Trigg said in the company's recently-released annual report. "Our current assessment indicates viability in the second half of this decade."
The same applies to the proposed Puketoi wind farm, 32 kilometres east of Turitea.
OMG, a "friend" isnt hard data I have access to....I just use public data and public papers....also there is no way to verify such unless its public data....but I will have a deeper dig see if I can find numbers to back this, it would be interesting...but its potentially dangerious to say its dropping, ie,
Also consider we have been in a recession for several years and that often causes a drop in consumption....so we need to look at why that is happening. For instnce if rio-tinto is a huge % of the demand and they are operating at say 70% because of this, well OK, but when the recession ends and yes its 5 years at least then we will see a huge jump. In the meantime that slack has been taken up by consumers...and there are no new plants, that means there is the potential for a huge price spike.
regards
Also consider the investment opportunity.....so demand is static/down for three years, funny but thats the recession timescale...so its probably temporary...assuming this recession ends...
If you think we will come out of the recession but the SOE's are over-priced then it makes sense I would suggest to make a note in your calender to watch the share price v the recession / recovery every 3 months....At some point I expect the SOE over-priced (I agree with you) shares to bottom, say its 2 years from now....so I would then consider buying in and sitting on them because with a lack of new plant being put in now prices could jump and ditto profits...so you spend some time having nice dividends, then as that new plant comes on line sell...or hold....(I'd hold)...
Of course if you are a glumster like me I think all shares will be 50%+ if not 10~25% of their current worth.... so Im not in the share market anymore....and dont plan to be for 5 years...or when ever I think the share prices have bottomed....then I will buy the likes of Power companies...
regards
Peasants should pass the problem to the landlords who get the subsidy...fix the insulation or we take you to court for damages to our health. Most low income Kiwi are destined to rent for life anyway.
Rural folk have more options if the pointy heads have not imposed their idiocy with bans on woodburners.
Inventive blokes will see the potential for wood fired steam powered generators.
Why pay the lines charge. What is it now..$50 a week...$2600 a year...$26,000 a decade!
Solar charged house lights are here now.
I see low income Kiwi doing a move to the back blocks...wild game...plenty of trout....wood by the ton...back to the donkey and cart days of old.
Here's a simple comparision:
We are family of 3; in NZ I used to pay $180/mth for electricity during warmer months; $280-300/mth during the winter. We had 2 heat pumps for heating/cooling and electric hot water
Currently in Australia I am paying roughly $133/month during the summer and $90 /month during winter - we have two heat pumps running during summer (and occasionaly duirng winter). Hot water is electric also.
Electricity price in Australia is 24c/KwH (roughly the same as NZ).
So somewhere in between Transpower is screwing the consumers on their line charges...
To start with the climate is totally different....usage different.....floor area? insulation? losses? gains? heat pump plant age? type? etc etc.. you make no justifiable or fair comparison but conclude that NZers are being screwed....uh no.
Power in NZ is 20~22 centsNZ a kwh or there abouts, so at 24cents AU this is 28centsNZ, this suggests you are using far less and being over-charged. So we need the kwh per month and over 3 years...
The line charges should be seperated out, they are here.....so many cents per day...screwed or not should be obvious from that number, except
Line charges vary, sure, NZ has a small population but its spread out, I dont know if OZ is comparible....scaleing.....4 millions v 18millions....scaling has a factor of 0.8....so as you get bigger you are more efficient.....that cant be avoided...
Lets look at the line comapnies profits to see if they are making a mint......bet not.
Lets look at investment in the national grid...prices have been kept artificially low for a decade+ because essential upgrading has been put off so didnt feed into power bills. Now catch up is starting to happen so the costs are being recovered in a shorter time frame....as work is now done.......so bigger rises....
regards
Steven: you have to take into account that power generation in NZ is 80% renewable while AU is 20% renewable with associated consumables ie coal which is charged at international transfer pricing, and the biggest AU load factor is the massive peak-hour-use for air conditioning.
iconcast, point is you have to do apples with apples comparisons...so account for everything.....also Im pretty sure NZ is only 65%....renewable....URL?
and finally the posts in here and indeed the data/info say renewables cost more, yet from the way you have written this, its sounds the opposite?, today this isnt true......Now I expect that inside a decade this will be long reveresed.....Tide, wind and geo anyway....
regards
74% of our electricity is generated from renewables (2010); this percentage is set to rise over the next few years as various wind/geothermal plants come on stream.
There is a perfectly adequate wiki entry on the subject
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_New_Zealand
Steven: Dunno where I got the 80% from. Cropped up somewhere. Cant give you a URL. The problem in AU is the energy industry is on the receiving end of $10 billion in federal subsidies in addition to the revenue they get from the public. And the biggest charge is from the Transmission Line operators although the charge is not broken out on the invoices. The $30 per bill CM is referring to is the access to the grid fee plus meter rental. Thanks Andyh. You got in just ahead of me.
This more recent (2011) article states the figure is 79%:
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-08/markets/30128835_1_benef…
It certainly will have risen from 2010 as a number of projects were due to come on line.
This is always a useful and interesting site when it comes to electricity generation in New Zealand. Can't beat the generation figures in real time! What I find interesting is that when the wind is blowing we now generate about as much electricity from wind as we do from geothermal.
Thats cool.....but I'd like to see the data behind the jounalist's statement, or at least a confirmation from a second source. I will dig further as going from 65% to 79% is a step I have not noticed/seen written.....its a huge "improvement".
Ah here's why....
79% total 79 - 13% (geothemal) = 66% as geo isnt really "renewable" the steam gets used up...so it depends on how "renewable" is classed.....it also emits CO2...
Maybe it should really say, non-fossil = 79%
Also renewables % is or was falling...I'd like new/better data....things change so fast...
Renewable energy in New Zealand is primarily from hydropower. In 2010, 74% of the electricity generated in New Zealand came from renewable sources, a ratio that has been falling for decades while load growth has been met primarily by natural gas-fired power stations
regards
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.