The government will take the next two months look at options to keep workers affected by the Pike River mine disaster on the West Coast, with many workers already receiving relocation offers from Australian mines, Minister for Energy and Resources Gerry Brownlee announced this morning.
Brownlee would not elaborate much on what options would be considered, although expansion of Solid Energy's West coast mining operations, and TrustPower's Arnold River Hydro plans could feature.
Government will make an announcement in January on what options it would consider.
28 Comments
April 2010 West Virginia US coal mine disaster. Mr Brownlee why didn’t you stop Pike River ?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36183425/ns/us_news-life/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/25/west-virginia-mine-investigation-methane_n_694787.html
Why not add real value to our economy and our Kiwi workforce ?
Why spend millions of $ for enquiry when we all know the government (Supervisory authority) disregarded safety issues ?
Why not honour the people of Greymonth and spend this money constructing, especially with people made redundant a safe and decent future - building “The Pike River Aqua Centre” and businesses involved in fresh water in stead of destroying peoples and other life ?
Why not go “NZ100%pure Economy” in stead of dirty coal, dirty waters - a dirty planet ?
Why not make real money in our economy - and once and for all - why not stop uneconomic growth ?
Just a thought Minister.
Well - Minister, considering the timing, what an arrogant statement (see below) for the poor West-Coasters having now the most difficult time around Christmas/ New Year. More sympathy for the community with urgent encouraging and supporting actions would be appreciated.
As a minister not performing to high standards again (see above 8:04pm) – as the PM, I would sack you for your sluggish behaviour before Christmas !
The government will take the next two months look at options to keep workers affected by the Pike River mine disaster on the West Coast, with many workers already receiving relocation offers from Australian mines, Minister for Energy and Resources Gerry Brownlee announced this morning.
Brownlee would not elaborate much on what options would be considered, although expansion of Solid Energy's West coast mining operations, and TrustPower's Arnold River Hydro plans could feature.
Government will make an announcement in January on what options it would consider.
As PM, I would also sack you before Christmas for your sluggish behaviour !
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/video.cfm?c_id=1&gal_cid=1&gallery_id=115855
Helplessly unbelivable !
While the government is digging itself a bigger and bigger debt hole, the private sector is willing to pay to relocate the workers and give them new jobs, and the government thinks that is a bad thing??
Absolutely right.
For Pete's sake, banning open cast mining on principle - and sustainable logging -- are RELIGIOUS values being imposed on all of us by what is supposed to be a secular government.
We are going to have to choose between the religious value of "anthropocentricity", and the religious value of nature worship. By that I do not mean preserving Milford Sound - all Kiwis derive utility from Milford Sound. What I am talking about, is this treatment of EVERY LANDFORM and EVERY LANDSCAPE, regardless of utility, as if it were a living organism with a soul like us. "Don't bulldoze that hillside, you'll hurt the Gaia Earth Mother".
For Pete's sake, who CARES if Wellington Airport replaced a hill? Who CARES if Wellington Harbour was half filled in to create the CBD? Who CARES if the Paparoa Range gets the top knocked off it? Who will even notice apart from a dozen hardy trampers?
Are we a Christian country? No No No No No No No
Are we a secular country then? You THINK. We have actually gone thoroughly Pagan. That includes all the kow-towing to notion of "the Mauri life force" in trees and plants. If you think the Catholic Church was historically a force for stagnation and poverty, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Bollocks. You, I recall, are the believer here.
Those who seek to save forests (and I am one of them), and those who create forests (and I am one of them too) do so for carbon-cycle saving-from-depletion reasons.
It;'s not a religion, it's science. Some of us seek facts.
And - there is no such thing as 'sustainable logging' of a Westland Beech forest. That was spin. Take a look at any slip in the area - how thin is the humus? There's b-all there. Remove it in volume (and I'll bet your bottom dollar you'd argue there is no need to replace nutrient, right?) and you deplete it.
And anyone who thinks "just a little bit and it won't show", is a self-centred, short-term twit.
Interestingly, trashing places for 'wealth' it doesn't seem to make people happier - is that perhaps what the eye-of-the-needle bit might have been about?
What's your real problem? Lose money through a silly investment and trying to convince yourself it was somebody else's fault?
There's a lot of it about.
You sure show your colours, Mr Gaia Earth Mother High Priest.
"There's no such thing as sustainable logging".
YEAH, that REALLY sounds like objective, rational, "science" to me.
I take it you religiously never catch planes, because airports have required vegetation to be cleared, landforms altered, and even foreshores to be extended by reclaimation.
To whom does it "show" when some forest or landform of which we have thousands of times more, is altered? Do the Gaia Earth Mother High Priests scour Google Earth and hold Waiatas when they spot something somewhere in the wilderness? What did you do before Google Earth? Did the Gaia Earth Mother Priesthood keep up regular patrols of the most inaccessible parts of the landmass?
Actually, most human beings in well off countries plant lots of trees for reasons of utility. Look at any long established suburb. The lower density the better.
The forest cover in well off countries has been steadily increasing for decades.
No humans in history caused as much deforestation as hunter gatherers. The more primitive, the more deforestation as a rule. The exceptions are the nature spirit religions who NEVER PROGRESS beyond cave man culture because they WON'T cut down trees.
Christian missionaries spent centuries cutting down pagans sacred trees, freeing them from progress-inhibiting superstition. Christianity has generally done humanity a service when it comes to progress; it is pre-Christian and post-Christian paganism that are the BIIIG obstructions.
Dishonest quote mine alert!
He didn't say "There's no such thing as sustainable logging". He said there is "no such thing as sustainable logging of Westland beech forests". This does not apply to all forestry, particularly the sustainable kind as practised through coppicing and replanting all over the world.
As for the rest of that nonsense - equating environmental science with some daffy wiccan religious caricature that you presumably made up, or got from a Chick Tract or something? Absurd. Are you really so completely incapable of addressing anything without gross intellectual dishonesty, misrepresentation, strawman bullshit and outright lies?
"No humans in history caused as much deforestation as hunter gatherers. The more primitive, the more deforestation as a rule. The exceptions are the nature spirit religions who NEVER PROGRESS beyond cave man culture because they WON'T cut down trees"
"The forest cover in well off countries has been steadily increasing for decades."
http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/economic-history/3/2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Oldgrowth3.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
http://www.fao.org/sd/WPdirect/WPan0050.htm
http://www.newsfromafrica.org/newsfromafrica/articles/art_9607.html.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070511100918.htm
http://www.cgiar.org/Newsroom/releases/news.asp?idnews=663
I wonder how viable that really is? Even if there weren't legal restrictions in place, and it was purely dependent on technical and engineering capability, how would it come out of a cost/benefit analysis? I don't know how much it costs to dynamite and bulldoze the best part of a mountain, but expect it would be a very expensive long term project. How long would it take to recoup the costs? Any geologists or engineers who could fill in some of the details?
Hi all, sorry didn't get a chance to update this one further. One possible option proposed by the Greymouth Mayor was for land swaps between the council and DoC.
The council would get DoC land that could be mined, while the council would give DoC land to be used as conservation land.
Nothing is concrete yet. The announcement was basically we looking at looking to do something next year.
Just asked Brownlee whether govt might look at any law changes like it did after the CHCH quake, and he said the were events of different magnitudes so probably not.
Cheers
Alex
Where are the statistics on particulates (soot, smoke) from coal fired electricity generation in modern economies, that cause this murderous atmosphere you are talking about?
Funny thing, but in the 1950's, electricity was advertised as "coal by wire". It finished the deadly annual London smogs.
It is incredible how many ignorant people THINK "coal fired" energy puts smoke into the air. While well informed Greenies like PDK are aware of the facts, they are quite happy to tale advantage of the ignorance of thousands of their constituents on things like this.
Then one day the Greenfly party decided it was time to walk the talk and Norman declared his intention to donate all his spare income for the rest of his working life...all of it!....into the replanting of the native forests across the whole country...knowing there would be no return for at least 50 years and then only by way of a tourist plus...the real native wood bonanza would not arrive for 300 years....well done that man. I'm sure all the greenfly members will join Norman and follow his lead 100%....yeah sure.
Canada? Is this a trick question. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada#Economy
YAHOO ONLINE
YAHOO from PhilBest.
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.