When you are a big-wig in the oil industry, you've no need to answer a letter through the 'letters to the editor' column with its 250-word restriction - you can claim the whole of the EDITORIAL/OPINION block to get around it!
Mr Pfahlert, Petroleum Exploration and Production Association executive officer opened today's Southland Times opinion piece with,
"Environment Southland councillor Robert Guyton has asked what drilling companies would do in the event of a serious spill."
To his great credit, Mr Pfahlert then launches into a detailed description of a range of contingency plans he hopes would address a serious spill should it occur off the coast of Southland. He cites 'international support', the use of oil dispersants, booms and skimmers, a wildlife response unit and 'well-capping technology' that must necessarily be sited overseas. Each of his points are highly contestable and I'm compiling a response that addresses those but most striking to the casual reader would be a counter to Mr Pfahlert's analogy of the air crash. He says,
"By way of analogy, we don't design planes to protect passengers when they crash, They are designed for the purpose of flying, yet people who fly understand that the consequences of an air crash are often fatal. "
Goodness! There's so much to play with there! I'm thinking immediately of those who choose not to fly and wondering about Southlanders who choose not to have oil rigs off shore of their beaches. Mr Pfahlert's analogy doesn't work so well there! There's the whole insurance issue as well. Airlines, you'd imagine, compensate the families of those killed in air-crashes? Will the oil industry cover all the damage that results from a spill? Car manufacturers provide an analogy too, with their designed-for-a-crash vehicles, shock-absorbing chassis, air-bags, side-strengthening etc. And of course, travellers can go by bicycle or even, perish the thought, walk.
I think Mr Pfahlert chose a poor analogy in his falling-from-the-sky passenger jet.
Still, I mustn't be churlish. I was very gracious of Mr Pfahlert to respond to my questioning so comprehensively.
I expect he'll get some response via the 'letters' column.
Perhaps you, gentle reader, might be moved to put pen to paper.
Later today, I'll transcribe the article here, or perhaps lift Kylie's scanned copy. Sadly, the Southland Times doesn't put it's Opinion pieces on line any more.
28 comments:
Your fight smells a little of the whole 'not in my backyard' argument.
I bet you drive your little motor car around quite happily and will continue to do so, just as long as that nasty smelly bird and fish killing oil isnt produced anywhere near you.
Na, don't produce it here, ship it in, use those huge tankers that need millions of tons of the stuff just to get across the oceans......
Come on Robert, the sooner you sell your car and start biking for real, then the sooner people may think you have a real argument.
I'm more than willing to be realistic about the energy situation southernright. If we continue to open new increasingly risky fields, the chances of environmental disaster are increased dramatically. I have no objection to those already in operation and believe those fuels should be being directed toward better, greener alternatives to transport, food production and all of the things we now have, coupled with a re-think about what we use fuels for. As to using my car more often than I have to, fair cop! I get complacent. Though I can't bike to town this morning for my meeting (it's blustery out there and 39km there and back's a bit of a challenge in these conditions), I'll take your suggestion and up my game.
If people who live at sights where industry like coal mining or oil drilling can be dismissed because of the 'not in my backyard' argument, that makes a mockery of natural justice doesn't it (every body living in New Zealand is disqualified from commenting on things that affect New Zealand etc.)
We should be intelligently tackling energy isues and using the fuels we have got now, to prepare for the time when they are not so freely available. Don't waste them on a pumped-up lifestyle. Thus endeth my wee rant for the morning :-)
Still, I mustn't be churlish.
Something to look forward to.
Got the kids of to school now so here's the scanned 'opinion'.
http://kvisit.com/Sm5LAAQ
This comment is a bit disturbing
He cites 'international support', the use of oil dispersants, booms and skimmers
Booms and skimmers will work great when blowing 40+ knots in the area they call the roaring forties
John Pfahlert named me when he responded to my ODT letter last week in which he claimed that oil companies are only responding to public demand for fuel, so according to him they are blameless when it comes to climate change. The ODT said my reply to him "had not been selected to publication". I was hacked off with that. Fossil fuel companies (eg Solid Energy & here the petroleum producers) are the ones who call for 'balanced debate', doesn't seem very balanced to me & now Mr Pfahlert gets an opinion piece in the Southland times !
The claim that oil companies are only supplying us with what we want completely ignores the influence oil companies have had in the way our society is structured, going right back to when light rail was removed in the USA in the 1st half of the 20th C.
We have a government who put money into 'roads of national significance' and local bodies design towns where it is almost impossible to function without a car – eg ,in Dunedin all the hardware shops are in 1 part of town with an inadequate bus service.
Anonymous - don't hold your breath (or more in keeping with the tenor of your comment, do :-)
Forever in your debt Kylie.
Charlie - that sticks out a mile doesn't it! Mr P hasn't spent any time in Te Ara a Kewa, or he'd not make such a claim.
His blithe claim that emergency equipmenmt would be sourced from 'overseas' doesn't stand scrutiny either. How long did it take to get such plugging gear to the Gulf of Mexico, hardly a far flung isle like ours? There are many holes in Mr P's argument that need...plugging!
Viv - I'd like to publish your letter here. My email is:
guy10@actrix.co.nz
What is to be done eh Bobby?
Borrow or payoff? mmmm what a contest.
Put whatever caveats are required up against the drilling companies, and go get that oil.
Bet you that the employment opportunities would be snapped up by the Riverton locals.
The increase in Riverton dirt may well make locals very wealthy.
The ongoing benefits to local businesses would not be sneezed at.
Would you have it that your local folk should not share in the bountiful increases Bobby?
By all means place plentiful controls and obligations, but do not be so short sighted as to halt all progress. Are you waht is called a modern day luddite Bobby?
Southernright you are right re our need for oil ...BUT there is more than one source of oil.... The oil that Mr Pfahlert wants to procure is in non renewable ie finite when its gone it is gone..
The oil field a Robert correctly points out would be in what is a strategically prime ecological place in the world ie very close to the Antarctic ..
If a spill happens like the Gulf of Mexico its too late to clean up after the event ... the damage has already happened!!
Of also interests it will also most likely done the damage to start destroying our own fishing industry yes this includes our Oyster beds !
Are there other options YES and we in Southland have the answer a RENEWABLE resource that grows well its called TREES and it can be made at this factory Solid Energy planing ( yeah instead of the disgusting pollutant lignite resource ) at Mataura..... yes Southernright we have and can grow enough to supply possibly all of our transportation needs and create plenty of jobs in the process. Trees are carbon neutral re emissions ( and that information comes from Parnell Trost of MAF re Venture Southland wood energy forum Nov 2010!! )
Also using our abundance of wind around our coast we can harness this renewable resource not only to enjoy as much electrical energy we want but also to make Hydrogen from the sea water to also power our transportation needs.
Whats the problem we need people in power who care enough about this country to think and ask are other answers than traditional ones ie left brain thinkers ..sadly at present we haven't got it they are to self focused on looking after their own and friends self interest/agenda.
Don't drop the churlishness.
When the Acting Minister for Energy, Hekia Parata, was asked who would ultimately be responsible for any drilling related disaster involving Petrobras, she told the house it was Maritime New Zealand.
The oil Companies stand to profit most from any oil produced and do not have any real responsibility to rectify any damage caused through their drilling. The tax payer will ultimately cover the costs.
Mr Pfahlert described the assistance we could expect from other nations but did not explain who would pay for it.
A direct quote from the Government's energy strategy:
"The Government wants New Zealand to be a highly attractive global destination for petroleum exploration and production investment so we can develop the full potential of our petroleum resources."
To make us highly attractive, one has to wonder what has been given away to make this happen.
http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.com/2011/08/nationals-national-energy-strategy.html
Lofty - they are no employment opportunities on offer for Riverton locals.
What on earth made you think that a deep water oil rig would provide jobs to locals?
Pauline - you are onto it, re tree-power.
Also regarding Our fabulous Oysters, but let's not forget Titi! Rakiura Maori stand to have their traditional harvest ruined for all time. That's not going to count in Mr P's favour. At all.
As oil company's dither, delay and fail to deliver when there is an oil spill, the environment pays the price and then as bsprout describes, the tab for the very expensive response needs to be picked up. Who will do that? We'd need to look to past events to see how willing those companies are to cough up.
Anonymous - It'd be churlish to.
A bob each way
Southernright- the fossil fueled excesses of western society need to be changed to stop runaway climate change. We all live in this oil based economy which needs to be re-designed,and until we set up society to run on fewer carbon based fuels most of us will need to use cars some of the time to be able to participate fully in that society AND make the changes we must make. Using your reasoning, it wouldn't be possible to comment on healthy food unless you disengaged with the system & starved yourself
it's blustery out there and 39km there and back's a bit of a challenge in these conditions
Time to re-open the Tuatapere Branch?
Tuatapere's 40-something km to the west and the wind can howl in from the sea - I'm all excuses!
The Tuatapere Branch ran from Invercargill to Tuatapere, via Riverton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuatapere_Branch
It pretty much follows SH99 for most of the way. The land parcels and some of the formation are visible on Google Maps, especially where the bridge used to cross the estuary. If it weren't for some short-sighted decisions in the 1970s you could have made your trip by train.
Oh, that Branch!
I missed your meaning AC but now that I know you're referring to the track and trains we stupidly 'disposed of' I'm feeling stink. The removal of the bridge across Jacob's River Estuary is a still-festering sore in Riverton's history and a monumental act of idiocy brought about by the local town fathers against the will of most of the town. It's at a town-meeting on the issue that I first witness the bullying that can occur when those who believe they 'own' a community are faced with an up-rising by too-few people. First time I'd seen seemingly respectable men lying for gain and squashing dissent with authoritarian behaviour. Not a pretty sight for an impressionable young man like myself!
Interestingly, it's those very same people who complain about our driftwood artists activities. Still keeping their boot on the throats of those who might want to make their own mark on the town.
In case you are wondering, this morning's rant has been provoked by two things - the front page news that the 'Longwoods are a mining magnet' and Bryce Johnston's spot-on Opinion piece on Waituna.
Each of those has been sufficient to wind me up. Looks like it'll be an interesting day.
I concede that there may not be employment opportunities at this stage Bobby, but when the industry gears up there most probably will be.
What about the rest of my questions Bobby?
e.g. property prices, share in the bountiful increases , you being a modern day Luddite etc?
Looking forward to your reply on this day that you are wound up.
Bobby where can I find the Bryce Johnston's spot-on Opinion piece on Waituna?
I want to build up a library of such articles to assist myself informulating an action plan.
Ned Ludd's a hero of mine Lofty.
I've posted the Waituna story.
Post a Comment