[Moorf]

Another popular request for a "Myths Exposed" (remember, not EXPLODED, just Exposed - ie. we're just telling it as we each see it), and mainly from those living here, or who have lived here, please. :)

Is NZ as eco-friendly, "green" and clean as you thought you'd find it? Does the city/town you live in suffer from winter smog? Do you find shopping trolleys in the rivers, old fridges and sofa's down gravel tracks, dodgy chemicals being sprayed overhead and stinking rubbish piling up in landfills?

Or are you experiencing NZ as a land free of pollution and waste, with un-touched beauty, beaches free from oil and other debris and a population (and Government) who respects and cares for its upkeep?

Over to you....

[Familyofmonkeys]

This is one of the things we have noticed most since we have been here in NZ.

I have not yet come across a dirty public loo that has run out of toilet roll....and believe me we have seen alot on our travels around Auckland, what with changing nappies every 5 minutes.

In the UK, when ever anything 'nice' it built for public use, some lower element of society always 'seems' to spoil it for everyone else. (No offense to anyone...I know this is not the case everywhere, just in my personal experience) I know you are going to get this everywhere in the world, but in my own experience there is alot less grafitti and vandalism. I expected that in Auckland, being the largest city, it would not be that different compared to most UK cities. There is however, significantly less destruction. It was a pleasant surprise to find that all of the kids playgrounds we have visited, so far, have been clean. No broken glass, cigarette butts or stale urine round the edges.

Another personal observation. When the guys came to collect the rubbish, they pick up any dropped litter as they go along. In all of the places we lived in the UK (quite a few) we had to pick up all the rubblish left lying around that had been spilled while the bins were being emptied. The recycling system of rubbish collection 'seems' to be similar to what we were used to in UK, so not sure how 'green' this is compared to the rest of the world.

Last observation, and it might not be true in summer time. When we arrived and weather was still warm enough to go to beach, it was actually clean. No ice cream wrappers and lolly sticks or beer cans. when i lived by the sea in UK, you didn't go to local beach as it was so dirty. I suppose this might be due to much smaller population here. There are virtually no shops here selling tacky plastic sea side souvneirs here, and you will have to go along way to find an ice cream in many places here. It's nice being able to go to the beach with a picnic, and have peace and quite and some personal space. Kids don't ask to go into tacky shops or pester for ice creams, as there aren't any!!

I know this is only my limited experience here. I wouldn't dream of commenting on the larger issues of rebbish dumps, smog etc. I simply do not know enough. But as for the the 'little things' that make life so nice here, yes it feels 'greener' than i am used to.

[willsken]

I wouldn't say NZ would be considered particularly green as such but I have to agree with the above post in that there is very little destruction of public spaces and the place is a lot cleaner than I was used to in the UK. If any graffiti appears then the council is very quick to get rid of it. I'm recycling my rubbish for the first time in my life, as it's expected here. The whole place, to me, feels a lot cleaner and nicer all round.

[Sam B]

Much, much cleaner, one of my definite pluses about NZ. Much less litter and graffiti. Cambridge is so clean it's almost a bit Stepford wives, but I love it.

Kerbside recycling began in Cambridge one month after we arrived, so a bit behind the UK, but EVERYONE does it, and they take all grades of plastic 1-6 so able to recycle much more than I could in the UK. Also there is loads less packaging from weekly shop thanks to veg all being loose and no ready-meals to be tempted by, so we are only producing 1 small bag of rubbish per week, which makes me happy (family of 4).

Bit behind on the carrier bags thing, but they're catching up, and there's lots of talk about it on the radio, tv etc.

No nuclear stuff - yay!

Houses are uninsulated and wasteful, but no central heating, so that's less carbon.

Less public transport and more driving, not so good.

Some litter, not much, but often in disappointing places like beauty spots.

Much of the original forests logged and become grazing, many native bird species now endangered, lots of introduced pests. Bit sad.

Less consumerism in general, real culture of make do and mend. Good trade in 2nd hand goods. Few areas of manufacturing. Hydro-electric power is common, less smoking power stations like in UK.

Overall - I'm a happy greeny.

[jubjub]

Personally, I see as much graffiti/tagging as I did in Glasgow, and there has even been some on our own fence here :mad: and we dont live in a bad area either!. But the litter is much less evident, probably cos there seem to be litter bins absolutely everywhere, there is just no excuse for being a litter lout.

The recycling system is much the same as it was in my area of the UK, except here it goes out in separate boxes and not just in one big bin.

Driving around, I am regulary staring at the spare tyre or up the exhaust of a 4x4, whereas in UK I was more likely to be behind a similar smaller vehicle. So in my observation petrol fume output would appear to be higher due to larger vehicles in regular use.

OK, confession time, while reading my Womans Day :o (yeah yeah I know Im sad!) I came across an article about rubbish that said the following as its introduction...


New Zealanders can no longer hold our country up as the clean green paradise we once claimed it to be. We throw out more rubbish per person than the average Brit, we belch out methane gas at a greater rate than any other developed nation and we have the fourth highest car ownership rate in the world. We throw away 3.2 million tons of trash each yearm which ranks us in the top 10 waste offenders in the world.


The source of this quote was from the Wasted book, here is the website for the tv show http://www.wastedtv.co.nz/

The article goes on to quote the Reduce, Reuse, Recyle message. Tips on how to reduce your own rubbish can be found ... http://www.reducerubbish.govt.nz/

[srivett]

This is just what I want to hear. Great input. Keep it coming :)

I'm looking forward to the day I can actually start contributing to these topics instead of just collecting the information like a magpie...

[Andy&Carol]

We haven't introduced ourselves yet, but that was one question I was going to ask.

I think I would have just given up if someone said the place is full of litter and vandalism. I'm not reading any more replies on this post just in case!
Carole

[John Z]

DON'T READ THIS CAROLE!

I was disturbed by the story someone told me in NZ about their neighbour:

the particular kiwi-neighbour digs a big hole in the ground where he dumps ALL his litter. When the hole is full or not big enough, he just digs another hole. It was said to be "normal" for many kiwi's... The given explanation was that people in NZ are surrounded by so much (natural) beauty that they think their behaviour wouldn't make any difference.

For me, this would relate to the way so many people use log burners. I think it's really great that the government seems to do something about it. On the other hand they ALSO SHOULD COME UP WITH A PROPER SOLUTION/ALTERNATIVE though.

John Z.

[Lupin]

It's an interesting one.

NZ is nuclear free.
NZ has more clean beaches, forests, national parks and mountains than you could explore in a lifetime.
In general NZ towns and cities seem clean and attractive.

But they do arial spraying here, use pesticides banned in Europe, drive everywhere, have logged most of the native bush and for such a tiny population the human impact here is more evident than is proportional, imo.

I 'feel' I'm living somewhere cleaner and more green :)

[willsken]

.

I 'feel' I'm living somewhere cleaner and more green :)

That's how I feel. Deep down you know it's not that green but on the surface it really feels clean and green.

Agree with the comment made earlier to. Great the governement is trying to do something about it but it would be great to see them provide solutions as well.

[dilanium]

I must say, that though I don't live in NZ (yet), the governmental policies and attitude towards the environment seems a vast improvement from those in the US. but then, I think I may be biased against the US.

[Super_BQ]

NZ is nuclear free

Without trying to sound pro-nuclear, I still don't understand the resentment of nuclear power in NZ. In the next century it will truely be the choice for green power. After all, how many terrorists live in NZ that would take advantage of the nuclear waste to make WMDs? Is the possibility of a nuclear accident that fatal enough to permanently damage the whole country? Look at where the 2 atomic bombs dropped in Japan, there are people living there.

I'm sure there will be those that are hardened up and will live without the use of buring wood in their homes. Wait until power prices go 10 times more than other nations that use nukes.

[John Z]

Without trying to sound pro-nuclear, I still don't understand the resentment of nuclear power in NZ. In the next century it will truely be the choice for green power. After all, how many terrorists live in NZ that would take advantage of the nuclear waste to make WMDs? Is the possibility of a nuclear accident that fatal enough to permanently damage the whole country? Look at where the 2 atomic bombs dropped in Japan, there are people living there.

I'm sure there will be those that are hardened up and will live without the use of buring wood in their homes. Wait until power prices go 10 times more than other nations that use nukes.

Please tell me this is a joke. A very bad one, in many ways.

[kanatakiwi]

I'm going against the grain here (so flak jacket on) but I think the "Clean and Green" image is largely just that... image.... a huge amount of money has gone into marketing NZ as clean and green for the tourist business.

And because of the frequent wind and rain the country does remain very green and clean of smog etc. However its not really because of anything the people are doing.

I guess everything is relative , but as I come from a pretty clean place to start with, I am not going to say that the beaches and parks are clean with no litter etc. The beach clean ups that take place occassionally certain net a huge haul of junk from the water and shoreline. I think people are still in the "throw away" mentality. Not all people, but certainly a certain segment of the population.

On our street we put out a bin each week that is less than half full but nearly every other bin on our street is overflowing with garbage, and you can see things sticking out that clearly belong in the recycling. I see people out spraying the parks and beaches with weedkiller all the time and when you go to the garden shop they just want to recommend chemical solutions for pests , weeds etc. And yes there is aerial spraying of large areas of that lovely green space and no one pays much attention to exactly what pesticides etc are being used. .

Also on a street near me there is a deadend with some green space and we walk there and regularly find people have dumped things like old washing machines, clotheslines, shopping carts etc. The residents got council to block the path in so people couldn't drive in there and unload their junk but they are still carting stuff in there anyway.

Malls, universities and public places do not recycle, the bins are full of drink bottles etc that should be put in a separate bins. How hard would that be?
And dont get me started on plastic bags. NZ uses 22 million a week! Thats a lot for a small population. New World is one of the worst places, if you buy 10 things chances are you will come out with about 6 plastic bags. There is only now beginning a small attempt to cut down on this usage. My work with marine issues has made me aware that most of the whales, dolphins and turtles that wash up dead have plactic crap in their intestines.

I could go on. but my basic point is it really depends where you are coming from. Yes there is lots of lovely green space and parks here and it is clean compared to some other places on this planet. If you are coming from a heavily industrialized area you will notice that as a big improvement.

But there is a lot that could be done. Most of it is the small stuff, but it is stuff that we as individuals need to take resposibiity for.

There is a complacency here about environmental issues that I find disturbing.

[Lupin]

Without trying to sound pro-nuclear, I still don't understand the resentment of nuclear power in NZ. In the next century it will truely be the choice for green power. After all, how many terrorists live in NZ that would take advantage of the nuclear waste to make WMDs? Is the possibility of a nuclear accident that fatal enough to permanently damage the whole country? Look at where the 2 atomic bombs dropped in Japan, there are people living there.

I'm sure there will be those that are hardened up and will live without the use of buring wood in their homes. Wait until power prices go 10 times more than other nations that use nukes.


Actually I'm very interested in James Lovelock's take on nuclear energy now being the only viable option to dig us out of the global warming hole because we've missed the boat on harnessing other clean, green and SAFE energy sources.

However your post is twaddle. Total twaddle.

[andrewandjane]

Without trying to sound pro-nuclear, I still don't understand the resentment of nuclear power in NZ. In the next century it will truely be the choice for green power. After all, how many terrorists live in NZ that would take advantage of the nuclear waste to make WMDs? Is the possibility of a nuclear accident that fatal enough to permanently damage the whole country? Look at where the 2 atomic bombs dropped in Japan, there are people living there.

I'm sure there will be those that are hardened up and will live without the use of buring wood in their homes. Wait until power prices go 10 times more than other nations that use nukes.

ive always tried to shy away from some of the more controversial issues and leave my opinion out of it here BUT I really hope this sort of attitude is a joke:uhoh

As for it truely being a choice for green power :exit get real..

just becasue theres little emmissions directly attributed to it in terms of particulates/CO2 does not make it green, the amount of waste which in real terms no one knows what to do with makes it unsustainable and far from green. Not to mention radioactive emmissions..News flash..just because you cant see it doesnt mean its not there and its clean!!

When NZ has the capacity for such a large amount of renewables from geothermal, wind and tidal, in addition to small scale solar thermal why even considering Nuclear is well beyond me.

[Familyofmonkeys]

Nuclear power is NOT free energy. Uranium deposits are already starting to run low...and will therefore increase in cost eventually. Also, what about the cost of disposing of all the radioactive material left over, which has a very long half-life. This is where your costs are!! When all that radioactive waste can no longer be farmed off to other countries for cheap disposal, who is going to pay the bill for that one?

[willsken]

When NZ has the capacity for such a large amount of renewables from geothermal, wind and tidal, in addition to small scale solar thermal why even considering Nuclear is well beyond me.

Exactly. :nice1

[barryp]

NZ has a substantial reservoir of renewables, but most of that is explicitly offlimits to energy development via the Resource Management Act. And there's a fundamental problem of distribution - the geography prohibits an efficient grid, and the overwhelming majority of renewable energy lives on the South Island, where its users do not.

I'm not sure it's going to be possible for NZ to be green given the resource inefficiency of sprawl. Sprawl (a/k/a 'lifestyle block') settlement is part of the appeal of NZ to many migrants escaping denser settlements back home, and an image of The Good Life for people raised here too.

[Lupin]

I should emphasise that I am far, far from sold on nuclear power, in case my post was ambiguous!

[nippa&pippa]

For me, no more fly-tips at roadside (where people dump their piles of rubbish on roadside instead of taking to tip/dump) and no more car abandoned on roadside too:nice1 i have seen lots and lots of them in UK in rural locations:mad:

[Familyofmonkeys]

Yes.....bet you saw them is all the places we did! When we first drove through Titirangi we saw loads of junk along the roads, and thought the place was worse than UK. Then realised it was all stuff put out by people renovating houses, and there was a collection service for it.

[phatsharpie]

Just in case anyone is interested, NZ was rated #1 in the pilot (2006) Environmental Performance Index prepared by Yale and Columbia Universities.

Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_2006_Environmental_Performance_Index

The actual report: http://www.yale.edu/epi/

Brian

[sfordjasiri]

DON'T READ THIS CAROLE!

I was disturbed by the story someone told me in NZ about their neighbour:

the particular kiwi-neighbour digs a big hole in the ground where he dumps ALL his litter. When the hole is full or not big enough, he just digs another hole. It was said to be "normal" for many kiwi's... The given explanation was that people in NZ are surrounded by so much (natural) beauty that they think their behaviour wouldn't make any difference.

John Z.

I can't say whether that applies to Kiwis, but I did see this sort of thinking many many years ago when I was treking around in Nepal. The type of tourist who had hiked days into the mountains would never think about littering, but I often saw Nepalese people unwrap something and just drop the wrapper/packaging on the ground or trailside. A Peace Corps worker I asked about it said that it was one of the things they were trying to get across to the Nepalese: That the place's natural beauty was what the tourists were coming to see, that the plastic did "go away", and that as more and more people traveled these areas the litter would become a problem.

[Sam B]

The environmental message is very strong at my children's school as well. They are both even more militant than they were before now..

[willsken]

We have a recycling group at school called the Green Teens. In the staffroom as much as possible is recycled and also paper from the classrooms.

[nippa&pippa]

My ds' kindy is one of few kindy in NZ that are environmental kindy that have recycling system, lunch boxes had to be waste-free type (no wrapper, no clingy film, no foil etc!), they have worm farms etc. All kids are involving learning environment/eco-friendly etc through play etc. They visit farms and places do with eco... I was given letter explained what can and what can't he do at kindy like mention above, waste-free food.... :)

[katandbob]

I now work for a firm that recycles their paper, but the last just threw it!

The air is smoggy when its cold - but it blows away quickly (someone elses smog??)
Recycling - I wish they'd take more of the things that can be recycled - not just bottles - what about all the rest of the plastic - that goes into the land fill!

NZ is better than some countries but I think it could get better - its all about resource management - NZ ships its recycling to other countries - so its using energy to recycle?

I try to do my best - but would like to do better.
We now have a recycle shop at the tip for some of the stuff people dump - you can go buy it. I saw some cut glass crystal for $2 a glass!
Rob wouldn't let me get it!

I see huge bales of bottles, Haylage wrapping etc at the transfer station - its shipped to where ever to turn it into your fleese jumpers

Kat

[sweetpea]

I think Clean & Green is mostly a public relations ploy. It doesn't seem like NZ is any more environmentally conscious than California. It's just that there is such low population density that humans have less impact than in more heavily developed areas. And with the amount of rain that falls, things are green in color, and the wind blows pollution away.

Sorry -- I'm feeling a little like a sourpuss today. I think there are some things that go on here, environmentally speaking, that stick in my craw. It's still legal for people here to burn trash in their backyards -- and our neighbors do with seeming abandon. 1080, possum poison, is everywhere, and NZ is the only country in the world where it's still legal. There's little recycling in public places. Forestry is largely Pinus radiata monoculture. Housing is far from energy efficient - shockingly so.

That said, curbside recycling here seems good, and the incentive structure is great - you pay per bag of trash, but can put out unlimited bags of recycling. There are no sheep/cattle feedlots, almost all livestock systems are pasture-based -- so even though methane and runoff are still problems, they are less concentrated. Energy is costly, so you see a lot more people hanging clothes out to dry, turning off anything that isn't being used, etc. And there is generally less consumerism in society. I suppose it's a case of the glass is half-empty/full.

[aggelon]

Actually 1080 poison is still used in Western Australia as well, but they're not allowed to spread it by air drops

[willsken]

It's still legal for people here to burn trash in their backyards -- and our neighbors do with seeming abandon.

You can do this in the UK as well.

[jubjub]

[quote=sweetpea;143512] It's still legal for people here to burn trash in their backyards -- and our neighbors do with seeming abandon. quote]

Its strictly prohibited in Manukau city, as we found out when we burned some garden rubbish soon after moving in, one of our neighbours kindly bought the legislation to our attention. It may still be OK in rural areas, but not in our city boundaries.

[sweetpea]

Actually 1080 poison is still used in Western Australia as well, but they're not allowed to spread it by air drops

Mea culpa. The DOC site says it is used in Australia, Mexico, Japan and Israel.

[John Z]

I'm a huge fan of Google Earth, especially when I look up houses, places to live and get things in perspective. But what really amazed me, is the small amount of native forest! I remember when we drove from the north of the North Island to the south, somewhere in the middle we saw a "Norwood" factory that made me think of the way forests disappeared in Europe during the 18th century.

I don't know the story behind Norwood, but I'm a bit worried about how NZ treats it's future. Why? Because every new generation of "marketing-guru's" uses the numbers from the former generation and ads his percentage as a new environmental friendly goal.

New Zealand Forest Industry Vision 2025

From the New Zealand Forest Industries Council and the Wood New Zealand Business Plan (2001).

(in bold is the vision for the year 2025)

More than $5 billion outputs >$20 billion
4% GDP >14% GDP
23,000 employed (100,000 indirectly) 60,000 employed (250,000 indirectly) All industries use this as an excuse....
$2.4 billion export earnings >$14 billion
Third largest exporter Largest exporter
Top 20 global suppliers Top 5 global suppliers
1.8 million hectares 3.5 - 4 million hectares
20 million m3 harvest >40 million m3 harvest
$100 million supporting technologies industry $1 billion supporting technologies industry Again, they allways present this as an excuse, in real it is their research how to make more money.

There's a good side to the story too.

Wood is concrete bound carbon-dioxide. Therefore it's helping to resolve global warming (for as far as it really exists...) Again, it's a bad thing when wood is being used to heat houses, because then all the carbon-dioxide get's in the air/environment again.

But I'd prefer to see all this wood in forests, and/or in environmetally very friendly houses. And not only conserve existing native forests, but also aim to let them grow, become bigger again.

Sorry for being a bit green today...:D

[AlexUK]

We went to NZ for the millenium, at 6am new years day (jan 1st, 2000) when the various attractions etc had finish and we were walking back to our car through an auckland main street, the whole place was littered with streamers etc, absolutely everywhere.

We came back to the same street at about 1 after we had slept a bit, and the place was spotless, not a drop of litter anywhere, that was amazingly impressive.

[Familyofmonkeys]

We went to NZ for the millenium, at 6am new years day (jan 1st, 2000) when the various attractions etc had finish and we were walking back to our car through an auckland main street, the whole place was littered with streamers etc, absolutely everywhere.

We came back to the same street at about 1 after we had slept a bit, and the place was spotless, not a drop of litter anywhere, that was amazingly impressive.

The bin men here stop and pick up every bit of litter the drop...have watched in amazement several times now. They even got a broom from the bin lorry and swept neighbours driveway last week when the bag of rubbish they picked up burst open...you would never see that in UK!

[AlexUK]

The bin men here stop and pick up every bit of litter the drop...have watched in amazement several times now. They even got a broom from the bin lorry and swept neighbours driveway last week when the bag of rubbish they picked up burst open...you would never see that in UK!

Exactly, if a binman manages not to knock over the bin as they put it back im normally impressed.

[ruthyroo]

There's an interesting article in the Listener this week 'Melting Away' which focuses on the environmental sustainability of tourism to NZ, but has lots of other interesting snippets relevant to this thread...

"Air pollution already kills 1100 NZ'ers every year. Auckland routinely chokes under smogs worse than London's. Factor in dioxin dumps, one of the worst % of threatened species in the world, the loss of 90% of wetlands, a series of trashed commercial fisheries, one of the world's highest car ownership rates and the fact that more than 90% of lowland waterways are polluted by agriculture and more than 50 South Island rivers are choked with didymo, and it starts to look like New Zealand Inc is headquartered in a sick building.

Ah, but 100% Pure doesn't refer to NZ's environment, says Geoff Ensor of the Tourism Industry Association. It refers to a 100 % pure experience"

The article also refers to an anecdote about a SI backpacker-owner, who was getting grief from German backpackers about not providing recycling facilities. He dutifully installed buckets for glass, plastic and paper. Then when they had all headed out for the day he took the buckets and emptied them into the skip with all the other rubbish because there are no recycling facilities on the Coast.

Environmental sustainability is not about clean streets or clean public toilets. (Notwithstanding that they are much nicer to experience than the alternative!). NZ is no better than anywhere else in the world when it comes to dealing with the negative consequences of human activity - dealing with waste disposal (from rubbish to sewage), of intensive farming and pollution of waterways (just watch this space for further nitrification / algal blooms / dead and dying rivers and lakes if the much anticipated dairying boom materialises), of grappling with the invasion of pest species and loss of local biodiversity / native species, of providing sustainable transport systems or non-polluting forms of energy for household use.

I suspect that NZ's 'high' score on world enviro-friendly indices will be a result of its low low population density, and not much else. That is both NZ's weakness and its strength in this respect - the low population probably minimises and dilutes the environmental impact of a lot of behaviours, and it provides for a very pleasant living environment for those of us from more crowded parts of the world. But it also makes it very very costly (per head of population) to deal with issues like waste disposal, transport etc - no economies of scale, so providing public transport etc is really expensive. It has also led to a certain kind of life that consumes a lot of space and resources - witness the sprawl of the suburbs and the reluctance to live in shared / higher density housing.

All the above is just MHO.

[Sam B]

That's very thought provoking Ruthyroo, cheers for that.

[kzn2nz]

Without trying to sound pro-nuclear, I still don't understand the resentment of nuclear power in NZ. In the next century it will truely be the choice for green power. After all, how many terrorists live in NZ that would take advantage of the nuclear waste to make WMDs? Is the possibility of a nuclear accident that fatal enough to permanently damage the whole country? Look at where the 2 atomic bombs dropped in Japan, there are people living there.

I'm sure there will be those that are hardened up and will live without the use of buring wood in their homes. Wait until power prices go 10 times more than other nations that use nukes.

Firstly, let me say that I live in South Africa, which has some of the least green energy produced anywhere. SA has a coal based economy, which I stronly feel is not sustainable and that nuclear is maybe cleaner than coal.

The stats on nuclear are very good, until we start to investigate the long term fuel situation, where the amount of uranium available will be less than the demand. Precisely the reason that nuclear is cheap at present, is because there are so few plants. As they proliferate, the demand for fuel will outpace the supply, which means that prices will go sky-high. The demand will also lead to the depletion of available fuel and the projections are that within 50 years, at present predicted growth in the nuclear industry, it will take more energy to mine and refine the uranium to nuclear fuel grade than the uranium will ultimately produce.

Now, tell me again how nuclear is a sollution to anything???

With regard to people living at Hiroshima and Nagasaki - have you read anything about the plant, animal and human mutations, human cancer incidence and the like that took place at those areas after WWII?

Chernobyl is still a wasteland. Take a road trip through Chernobyl with Elena, here (http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/chapter1.html).
Or look at the photo essay on the legacy of nuclear, here (http://www.pixelpress.org/chernobyl/).

Bring on wind power, biogas, dark nights and power rationing rather than nuclear. Nuclear is not long term, but rather a feel good veneer plastered into place by a multi-billion dollar industry. The sooner we start to look at real long term sollutions, the better.

[Familyofmonkeys]

Firstly, let me say that I live in South Africa, which has some of the least green energy produced anywhere. SA has a coal based economy, which I stronly feel is not sustainable and that nuclear is maybe cleaner than coal.

The stats on nuclear are very good, until we start to investigate the long term fuel situation, where the amount of uranium available will be less than the demand. Precisely the reason that nuclear is cheap at present, is because there are so few plants. As they proliferate, the demand for fuel will outpace the supply, which means that prices will go sky-high. The demand will also lead to the depletion of available fuel and the projections are that within 50 years, at present predicted growth in the nuclear industry, it will take more energy to mine and refine the uranium to nuclear fuel grade than the uranium will ultimately produce.

Now, tell me again how nuclear is a sollution to anything???

With regard to people living at Hiroshima and Nagasaki - have you read anything about the plant, animal and human mutations, human cancer incidence and the like that took place at those areas after WWII?

Chernobyl is still a wasteland. Take a road trip through Chernobyl with Elena, here (http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/chapter1.html).
Or look at the photo essay on the legacy of nuclear, here (http://www.pixelpress.org/chernobyl/).

Bring on wind power, biogas, dark nights and power rationing rather than nuclear. Nuclear is not long term, but rather a feel good veneer plastered into place by a multi-billion dollar industry. The sooner we start to look at real long term sollutions, the better.

Absolutely!! This is what others here have tried to say, but you've managed to find the links to prove it too:nice1

[AlexUK]

I dont see this as something to keep me out of NZ, i see this as a reason to go.

Surely with the lack of recycling in that country the government would be willing to give grants to businesses that try to do something about it? Surely this is a great business opportunity?

Sorry ive always been an entrepreneur, cant help it :D But if anyone is interested in looking into this, drop me a PM! Never know, could make you and me fairly well off.

[AlexUK]

Ive actually got some great business opportunities that could easily be run in New Zealand, so anyone interested should pm me :D

[barryp]

Surely with the lack of recycling in that country the government would be willing to give grants to businesses that try to do something about it? Surely this is a great business opportunity?

Government funnels quite a few dollars towards recycling and reuse initiatives already. As carbon footprint concerns go from fancy words to implementation programmes, this amount is bound to increase. Already, one of my preferred data centre initiatives is being given consideration not for its pure operational benefits, but because the new solution uses far less electricity.

The business opportunities in this area are quite limited simply by population density. It's not cost-effective to build a large network of plants around the country, or ship low-grade recyclables offshore for processing. And I'm not sure how much better it is to recycle than to use the tip once you've figured in the energy required for collection and transport to distant facilities.

[AlexUK]

Government funnels quite a few dollars towards recycling and reuse initiatives already. As carbon footprint concerns go from fancy words to implementation programmes, this amount is bound to increase. Already, one of my preferred data centre initiatives is being given consideration not for its pure operational benefits, but because the new solution uses far less electricity.

The business opportunities in this area are quite limited simply by population density. It's not cost-effective to build a large network of plants around the country, or ship low-grade recyclables offshore for processing. And I'm not sure how much better it is to recycle than to use the tip once you've figured in the energy required for collection and transport to distant facilities.

I think it would be possible even if collection was based around auckland where a majority of the NZ population resides, there is easily enough people to run a successful operation and if it gets to the point where growth in this area isnt possible it can always be expanded depending on how cost-effective other areas are.

[EngiNurse]

The stats on nuclear are very good, until we start to investigate the long term fuel situation, where the amount of uranium available will be less than the demand. Actually, I think this is incorrect. With new reactor technology, the IAEA says we have up to 2500 years of uranium reserves presently: http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2006/uranium_resources.html
Uranium 2005: Resources, Production and Demand - also called the "Red Book" - estimates the total identified amount of conventional uranium stock, which can be mined for less than USD 130 per kg, to be about 4.7 million tonnes. Based on the 2004 nuclear electricity generation rate of demand the amount is sufficient for 85 years, the study states. Fast reactor technology would lengthen this period to over 2500 years.
Add in the fact that designs like the pebble bed reactors are inherently melt-down proof, make it nearly impossible for the waste to be diverted to weapons development, and can be designed to generate hydrogen as a byproduct (useful for things like fuel cell cars), and it seems to be a good option. Maybe not for NZ, but given that China is supposed to bring a new coal-burning plant online every week to 10 days for the foreseeable future, it needs to be on the table.

I'm all for renewable energy, but things like wind and solar aren't useful for baseload generation. And ultimately I'd like us to move to something like fusion for our energy needs (and this seems promising: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell ). But as James Lovelock (who came up with the Gaia theory) says: "We live in a nuclear powered universe. We're the oddballs by getting energy from burning carbon."

[kzn2nz]

You have a point there about the availability of uranium. There are vastly differing opinions on this, but somewhere in the middle we probably have the truth. Anyway, in SA, one reactor in the Cape went for a loop when someone left a large bolt in the turbine and started it up. The other turbine was down for maintenance and could not function. Now, you have a powerplant that draws current from the national grid, just to stay safe and cool.

I am a serious Doubting Thomas, because there have been too many incidents with nuclear energy. Pebblebeds are experimental and have not yet displayed any serious hazards. However, when you factor humans in, and natural disasters, I will almost guarantee you that something can and will (eventually) go wrong with these too. Just look at the bridge that suddenly and inexplicably collapsed in the US recently. It was designed and built to much greater than the minimum standards required for a bridge, and yet something just went wrong...

[kzn2nz]

Another reason why nuke power is a bad choice...

South Africa's nuclear research facility was 'broken into' the other day, and a supervisor shot and wounded.

Read more here... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/15/world/main3505603.shtml

[veronica]

hmm lots to think on here....
petrol emissions are worse than the UK. problem being we get the cars here from japan and the personal economy here doesn't support individuals modifiying their cars.

Agricultural spraying scares me, hopefully someone will organise that being phased out

No central heating and no insulation doesn't mean less pollution, my own experience here is that people will burn anything in their fires, not just clean logs and they have other forms of less energy efficient heating. Again the biggest thing against people getting insulation fitted is cost. personal economy.

on the positive side, no nuclear power so no nuclear waste... when someone spends the same amount of money on solar, wind, tidal and other forms of renewable energy as they have on nuclear we will have very efficient energy in NZ, we've certainly got the sun, wind and water to do it.

certainly much less litter left around, or other larger kinds of junk.

Recycling is encouraged here in Chch, not all plastics unfortunately, although please keep in mind the low population/cost effectiveness of machines for recycling.

yes the clean green image is easy to uphold with the low population but I do think they are working on it anyway.

tagging is a pain but I actually like proper grafitti. (even if I can't spell it)

No fires allowed within chch city but they are allowed in the country side, but then some of these people out there in the sticks don't have an option as its bury it or burn it cos there is no rubbish collection, up until recently it wasn't economic to ship the recyclable stuff out of queenstown, it cost more to do than the $ gains, I understand that that has changed now though.


there is lots of room for improvement here but I think it will happen, and the overall immpression as you look around is it isn't as scruffy or dirty as some of the cities in the UK.

[Rusty]

hmm lots to think on here....
petrol emissions are worse than the UK. problem being we get the cars here from japan and the personal economy here doesn't support individuals modifiying their cars.

.

I agree with a lot of your post, but did not understand this point.
Why are cars from Japan any worse than a Ford, Holden,etc?
I thought it was cars that reached 3 years old (new test in Japan) and sold on the grey market - are these cars any different to those sold 3 years old in any other country?
Maybe I am missing something.

[ourquest]

Perhaps the question we should be asking here is this: If New Zealand seems or feels greener to the majority of people is this inspiring them to make their own contribution to the environment? The more people visibly care for their country the quicker some sort of critical mass will be achieved where real change will take place. The future regarding global warming and energy reserves will affect NZ significantly (perhaps rethink buying that bach meters from the surf!) so one hopes that the powers that be will become more and more aware of the need to leave minimal footprints. As individuals we can begin this already...become the centre of your own universe, set an example, and be prepared to make some sacrifices to add genuine value to your actions.

The nuke debate is fairly unresolvable unless we all possess intimate knowledge of the workings of power plants. We certainly shouldn't argue the point that just because NZ feels greener it isn't necessarily, and then in the same breath argue that because we perceive nuclear power to be a disaster that it must be so. I have no bias, just posting a point here. But I have visited Koeberg's (South Africa's power plant) waste disposal site and the entire waste from (then) about 10 years of power generation, including the concrete encasement, took up the space of a domestic swimming pool. (note it wasn't actually in a domestic swimming pool!). All things being equal that would suggest a pretty efficient source of energy. But yes, NZ possesses huge reserves of natural running water and moving air and if these can supply the needs then all the better.

Back to a much earlier post regarding toilet paper and clean toilets, in a 8500km circumnavigation (by road) of both islands we never once encountered a lack of either, and we travelled with 3 boys who drink a lot (of water!).

To summarise my main intended point, as with anything which you start doing, one action leads to another, and by the time you are recycling, composting and bicycling more often, it makes you much more aware of other areas you can contribute positively, and so let's become proactive and make this one of our goals when we enter New Zealand as new immigrants.

[Super_BQ]

Sorry for my ignorance for not reading all the pages to this thread so no flames if i'm repeating something here.

I recall reading some months ago that the nuclear waste can be refined further so that it's half life can be dropped down to less than 100 years. Don't quote me on this but if that's possible, then nuclear energy and all the uranium is a 'sustainable resource'.

I would be hard pressed to believe any other form of energy is cheaper to produce than nuclear power. NZ power companies can continue to whip out wind turbines but at the end, it's all gonna cost more to the public. Besides, for the size of the country, we would only need a wee small reactor and would solve all NZ's power problems for the next 50 years.

This reminds me a course I took at uni titled "environmental economics". In NZ's sense, the country is on a complete different "marginal abatement curve" than other nations that are pro-nuclear. It really doesn't matter which country tries to claim they are the leader of being green if no one can be on the same marginal abatement curve. The results will be different.

Consider ourselves fortunate that NZ isn't dependant on the manufacturing sector where cheap power is pretty much the king.

In a previous post if we have enough uranium for the next 2 - 3 thousand years, then by that time we should be mining the moon!

Apparently there's suppose to be lots of Helium 3 (H3) on the moon which can produce pollution free energy! read here (http://www.betterhumans.com/blogs/dry_observer/archive/2006/01/28/4193.aspx)

The question would be, which countries would be more likely to exploit the moon (somehow I don't think NZ has that kind of resource)

BQ

[veronica]

fair point rusty, but its more a case of these cheap cars from Japan refuse to die and keep going for years when they aren't really eco friendly anymore.

[ourquest]

This is an example of just how complex these issues are, and we can't look at them too simplistically. The longer a car lasts the less need for a new one to replace it, and exactly how much damage does manufacturing a car do to the environment? I don't know, but a few extra emissions might be more than compensation. And where do the old Holden (for eg of a non-jap car) wrecks end up? Does this leach unwanted pollutants into the soil? etc etc.
Particularly with environmental issues we need an objective and scientific outlook, so that we can assess the FULL impact of each decision, action or statement.
Oh, and age of a vehicle is not entirely or necessarily linked to eco-friendliness. But statistically there is probably some truth in that (not to take away from my initial point though).