Post in Canterbury Energy strategy

Jun 24 02:28 UTC

Considering the power went out in Heathcote this morning and with the inclement
weather reminding us of how our friends in South Canterbury went without power
for two weeks during the last winter storm, this is probably a timely
discussion.

The last time we nearly got into a proper discussion of this topic was when
former councillor, Richard Budd discussed the possibility of a new cable into
Canterbury being the most appropriate way to secure our energy needs. In recent
posts I noticed a comment that "wind farms" are for PR and the cost-benefit
analysis does not stack up as well as a comment about the high cost to import
Swedish wind machines.

We have a number of options to consider, firstly renewables: generation from
wind, river, solar, wave and geothermal (though there are those who would argue
that timber is renewable...????)
Then there's oil and coal fired power stations and some argue we can burn coal
more cleanly than China can, so we should retain our coal. Of course there is
nuclear (ooowww I hear you tremble) and perhaps in the future bio-fuel power
stations.

The security of supply is probably the most pressing issue - those living in
South Canterbury will agree with me on this. Having a cable from elsewhere is
both costly - you can loose up to 80% of generation through transmission and
obviously the longer the cable, the more points it is at risk of failure.

We do not generate electricity in Canterbury! (yes on the border at the Waitaki
and yes - one wind machine which powers HQ in Tuam St) but not within the
province!

I've just returned from Europe and there's a huge amount of PR going on up
there (Andrew) as there are wind machines everywhere - and of course they have
money to burn on the machines too - that was me being facetious - I think the
Europeans are better at cost-benefit analysis and they have worked out that a
combination of renewables works - the windfarm in the Baltic Sea between
Denmark and Sweden is breathtaking. There is no doubt Europe has embraced
windfarms and guess what - they know we have them all over New Zealand too as
they know we are one of the windiest places on earth - ask any pilot the
windiest sector to fly in (the Tasman) or any sailor the roughest seas (Cook
Strait) - unfortunately they haven't visited to find out that we are ever so
slightly behind everyone else....

Let's for the moment discount nuclear - I doubt anyone in New Zealand thinks we
will ever give up our ban - and having resided on the Irish seaboard I can tell
you of the utter devatation of fish stocks by Sellafield - Chernobyl was only
one of a multitude of issues with nuclear power in the Northern Hemisphere -
and don't think that we live far enough away from Australia if they go nuclear
- the prevailing wind from Chernobyl was westerly and that meant that most of
the Northern Scots sheepfarms were decimated - that's much further than Sydney
to the South Island.

So what's next - well Mainpower are putting in a windfarm in North Canterbury
on Mt Cass which should be quite efficient if you consider the norwesters and
the easterlies that the top of the Teviotdales experience. Most in the area are
pro the idea except those who live close enough to see the machines as visual
pollution or even closer to hear the machines (very limited number if you look
at Mainpower's noise shadow visuals). I'm sure we all agree that wind is not a
constant and that we need other sources in combination.

Canterbury has 26 rivers (soon to be 27 if CPW goes ahead - yes I know its a
canal) while some are small and do not flow all year, rivers like the Waimak
and Hurunui can take more generation and at least there is continued flow
unlike CPW which will take the water out of the system entirely

Canterbury also has an extensive coast line and wave power would be very easy
to generate. There are very few days when the sea is flat calm in the Pegasus
Bay.

Solar energy seems to be more successful in small scale generation i.e at the
household level and it strikes me that if ECAN were to subsidise installations
of solar energy into households rather than log burner conversions there might
be a longer term and greater impact on the air quality?????

Geothermal has its sources though I doubt there is anywhere in Canterbury it
would work (except perhaps in and around Hanmer). Its more likely to be rolled
out in the North Island around Taupo.

If we were to burn coal on the basis of the argument above (we burn it more
cleanly than the Chinese) and to save moving it great distances (carbon
footprint and all that) then Canterbury would be the ideal location -
population, short disance from the West Coast etc. Personally though I think we
should leave both coal and oil in the ground if the lastest climate change
figures are correct (watch for another post on climate change)

If we start to generate energy from bio-fuels then watch the change down on the
farm from dairy to bio-fuels! However the food shortages would be
substantive....

So who is driving Canterbury's energy strategy? I'm not really sure? Do you
know? One thing's for sure - if water levels don't rise and a couple of cables
get blown down (or hit by lightning or knocked over by snow or..or) can the
last one out turn off the lights, please.

In summary if Canterbury experiences another winter like the one that cut power
to South Canterbury for two weeks shouldn't we be looking to secure our supply
- locally?