I suspect so.
Here it is, in all it's convoluted glory:
What a load of rot
Guess what Southland?
A few tree huggers would rather you didn't have jobs.
That's what all the rot we've been reading in the letters to the editor recently means.
Coal is bad, they say. Lignite is worse.
The funny thing about the Greens is that once they draw a line in the sand, they don't tend to move it.
No amount of reasoned scientific analysis will change their tiny one-track minds.
Here's a few facts:
Clean coal technology, demanded by European Union guidelines, means that not only is the technology already available to off-set carbon emissions, but that technology is also available to deal safely and effectively with the by-products of coal mining and power generation.
Over the past 30 years, research has led to the efficiency of power stations being improved by 30 per cent with even-better environmental performance.
This is improving all the time.
According to the International Energy Association, methane from active and abandoned coal mining areas in Germany is being used increasingly for heat and power production, thus removing a greenhouse gas from the environment and putting it to use.
Now the Greens won't tell you any of this because they don't want you to know it, and it doesn't fit with their “don't do anything anywher” philosophy.
Remember, these are the same Greens who forced Solid Energy to shift 1500 snails at the costof $10 million.
The snails were fitted with tiny transmitters which now stop them mating.
So they're going to extinct anyway, thanks to the green's actions.
Solid Energy lost 200 000 tones worth of sales because of the hold up of finding and shifting the snails.
Down here we could see up to 2000 jobs created from the various lignite mining projects.
At the end of it all, the companies have to reinstate the land as it was (obviously without the lignite).
But no, those “hate everything” Greens don't want job creation.
They don't want Southland to go ahead.
They don't want our standard of living to increase., no matter what the science says about clean coal and carbon capture.
I'll be remembering that when their Monster Raving Looney party comes looking for votes later this year.
ANNE-MAREE THOMAS
Invercargill
Guess what Anne-Maree?
It is a load of rot!
3 comments:
The counter view is that such small minded head in the sand, outdated thinking is tarnishing our great Island's reputation:
New Zealand turns out to be mining ever more filthy brown coal to burn in its power stations. It has the world's third highest rate of car ownership. And, with more cows than people, the country's increasingly intensive agricultural sector is responsible for approaching half the greenhouse gas emissions.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2009/nov/12/new-zealand-greenwash
New Zealand was a friend to Middle Earth, but it's no friend of the earth
Lord of the Rings country trades on its natural beauty, but emissions have risen 22% since it signed up to Kyoto
..if you read the small print of what New Zealand has actually promised, it is a measly 50% in emissions by 2050 – something even the US can trump.
This is not just political spin. It is also commercial greenwash. New Zealand trades on its greenness...
Nick Smith, Coal Trade Tim (Groser), Lignite Bill, and Browncoal Brownlee and the browncoal bluegreens were shaky in 2009,
wait till a 2011 article comes out...
You're a hard hitter anonymous!
I take it you don't find coal 'sexy' as Gerry Brownlee does!
I'm looking forward to the 2011 release and will share it with my friends.
Monster raving looney party? Sutch would be turning in his gravy.
Post a Comment