US consumer credit at record high; German and Chinese exports boom; Chinese steelmakers suffering; oil glut pushes prices down; UST 10yr 2.45%; NZ$1 = US$0.828, TWI = 79.0

"subverting the democratic process"

What democratic process?

Until May 2010, Canterbury Regional Council was governed by 14 elected councillors who were elected on a first-past-the-post basis from eight regional constituencies.

In March 2010, the Government sacked the Environment Canterbury councillors and replaced them with commissioners   Read more

Well, reading the stuff article that came from, the Green's say they did ask for permission during the phone interviews but acknowledge that as people didn't understand it meant that they had stuffed up and apologise.

So, no, not quite like leaking SIS documents or hacking Labour computers, or working with a campaign to undermine the head of the SFO when you are the Minister in Charge.

I just read the article on stuff.  It dosn't seem a deliberate attempt to mislead and it could be argued that ringing up to prompt online submissions is ok but filling them in on behalf is a questionable tactic.   When asked about the issue it was dealt with immediately with an acknowledgement that they had make a mistake.  The lesson is if you make a mistake acknowledge it and change. 

I'm not really sure how the Greens could have handled this differently apart from not phoning people in the first place.  

I'm not sure an attempt to get over human apathy is the same as the dirty politics scandal.

The Green party explained how they stuffed up and apologised. They say they will not do it again.

John Key does not explain how leaks from government departments to a partisan media occurred. Even though it was obviously directed against those that the government do not like or to divert attention away from government failings. John (and Judith) did not apologised. It seems likely John Key will repeat this behaviour if he gets re-elected because he sees himself as innocent. 

Dirty politics is part of a wider strategy over a number of years to create cynacism in politics, drive down the vote and gain electoral advantage because more right wing voters than left wing voters go to the polls in this enviroment. Simon Lusk who is a political consultant for a faction in the National party has openly discussed this.

Wheras the Green party have made a one off mis-judgement. So not the same.

Nice trolling Happy 123. You can always smell you coming by the f.... matter you are spreading.

how big is your wok?

.....shhhhh Gummy.......Peak Eggs.......peak salt.......peak vinegar.....peak mustard.......and peak lemons.........good to dip your green into.......the rise and fall of peak greens.......washed down with dihydrogen monoxide!!

To answer the usual selective material of Profile this is just a snippet from the much larger email stream.

We had the privilege of being closely involved in a steel industry study and pilot trial addressing these questions a few years ago, we provided the protocols and plantation sourced raw wood for charcoal production in existing coke ovens and ultimately supplies of charcoal from a range of species through our own retorts. These charcoal samples were then used in a test blast furnace owned by BHP/Bluescope Steel which modeled exactly the behavior of the production ones in use.



The results were outstanding. Renewable carbon from these sources substantially outperformed fossil sources in both quality of end product and efficiency of production, I believe the figure was close to a 40% production enhancement due to the higher reactivity of the wood charcoal. The key though is in obtaining sustainable sources in the volumes required. I recall a figure of 1 million tonnes of wood charcoal for the local steel producers which were themselves <1% of the global industry.

And another guy from South Africa:

The main problem with replacing coke in blast furnaces is the amount of

char(coal) required. One industry we have smelts silicon. As silicon reports

to the "slag" in the furnaces, the purity is affected by all elements that

report to the slag fraction. This includes the ash fractions in coal. As a

result, coal is not suitable as a reductant. Charcoal has the double benefit

of high fixed carbon and low ash making it the only realistic carbon source

that can be used. These guys have charcoal retorts spread across the entire

country. The cost of charcoal delivered to the furnace consequently has a

high transport element. As charcoal has low density, this simply exacerbates

the transport problem. Needless to say, charcoal for the metallurgical

industry is a major challenge. I simply cannot see how the world can grow

enough biomass to be able to supply the requirements adequately as long as

there is "cheap" coal available.

We have been working with the Canadian Carbonization Research Association (CCRA) http://www.cancarb.ca/ to explore the use of biocoal (biochar), in steel making.

Preliminary tests show that with low ash and low sulfur content (feedstock and process dependant), biochar can be a viable substitute for coal.

The challenge is the massive volume of material that's required in steel making.  We are talking in the 1000's of tons per day.

And one guy mentioning the pollution....

China, biggest steel producers in the world, have a very large coal reserve.

So they are able to get lower cost energy into what is an energy intensive

industry. Furthermore, just visit Beijing or Shanghai and experience the

atmospheric pollution and realise that the Chinese standards are not the

same as that in Western commercial set ups.

You have multiple experts in this field commenting on this subject, which is just a sideline issue from the normal technical discussion that occurs. Once you start using coal for transport fuel in processes such as Fischer Tropsch then the reserves will start going down hill really fast.

biochar is amazing