Reducing emissions: a kiwi perspective...

[hieronymous]

Being closer to Oz here than to any other country, and with strong similarities,  it is easy to assume we kiwis face the same problems and will benefit from the same solutions.  A case in point - our individual response to climate change and a personal responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions reduction. But as the following link shows, it pays not to jump to conclusions....

[Phoebe]

Interesting article.  Good to see an NZ perspective!  If only we had that much renewable energy in Aus

[EVangelist]

Mar 24, 2016 21:07:52 GMT 11 hieronymous said:

Being closer to Oz here than to any other country, and with strong similarities,  it is easy to assume we kiwis face the same problems and will benefit from the same solutions.  A case in point - our individual response to climate change and a personal responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions reduction. But as the following link shows, it pays not to jump to conclusions....

It is an interesting article although some of the comments below it point out that this somewhat anti-solar article is based upon a report commissioned by power companies, who have a vested interest in keeping households dependent on the grid, and would love households to increase that by charging EVs.  The last thing they want is every household with solar panels on the roof and Tesla Powerwall batteries on the side.  It would destroy their business.

But ignoring that, it's not suprising that an electric car fleet would help reduce NZ's emissions more effectively than solar power, when the NZ grid is already 80% renewable (mostly geothermal and hydro).

Some of the comments below the article though perpetuate misinformation.  Here's a few:

• "Nissan withdraw the Leaf from NZ" - no they didn't, they simply ran out of stock.  That is not the same thing.  One would hope they will import the 2017 model when it is released.
• a comment re how much extra power it would take to generate the power requirements if every car in NZ was electric - implying 1800 rivers would need to be dammed to do it.  This is nonsense.  An electric car will add around 10-15% to a household's power consumption, which represents 20-30% of national electricity use.  So if a nation's entire car fleet went EV, national electricity consumption would increase by about 5%, way less than the headroom in any national grid.
  
• "batteries that have a life of currently 2-5 years" - the global EV fleet has absolutely disproven that.
  
• "Studies have shown that it takes more energy to manufacture the average solar panel than what it will ever created during its lifetime" - this was true up until about 2010, but since then not. In fact the rate of improvement in solar technology since then means a solar panel completely pays back the energy used to make it in 1 to 4 years, hence over a 20-25 year lifespan, will generate 5 to 20 times the energy.
  

[hieronymous]

Mar 25, 2016 23:18:07 GMT 11 EVangelist said:

Mar 24, 2016 21:07:52 GMT 11 hieronymous said:

Being closer to Oz here than to any other country, and with strong similarities,  it is easy to assume we kiwis face the same problems and will benefit from the same solutions.  A case in point - our individual response to climate change and a personal responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions reduction. But as the following link shows, it pays not to jump to conclusions....

It is an interesting article although some of the comments below it point out that this somewhat anti-solar article is based upon a report commissioned by power companies, who have a vested interest in keeping households dependent on the grid, and would love households to increase that by charging EVs.  The last thing they want is every household with solar panels on the roof and Tesla Powerwall batteries on the side.  It would destroy their business.

But ignoring that, it's not suprising that an electric car fleet would help reduce NZ's emissions more effectively than solar power, when the NZ grid is already 80% renewable (mostly geothermal and hydro).

Some of the comments below the article though perpetuate misinformation.  Here's a few:

• "Nissan withdraw the Leaf from NZ" - no they didn't, they simply ran out of stock.  That is not the same thing.  One would hope they will import the 2017 model when it is released.
• a comment re how much extra power it would take to generate the power requirements if every car in NZ was electric - implying 1800 rivers would need to be dammed to do it.  This is nonsense.  An electric car will add around 10-15% to a household's power consumption, which represents 20-30% of national electricity use.  So if a nation's entire car fleet went EV, national electricity consumption would increase by about 5%, way less than the headroom in any national grid.
  
• "batteries that have a life of currently 2-5 years" - the global EV fleet has absolutely disproven that.
  
• "Studies have shown that it takes more energy to manufacture the average solar panel than what it will ever created during its lifetime" - this was true up until about 2010, but since then not. In fact the rate of improvement in solar technology since then means a solar panel completely pays back the energy used to make it in 1 to 4 years, hence over a 20-25 year lifespan, will generate 5 to 20 times the energy.
  

You note that the comments below the article perpetuate misinformation, but use some of them uncritically nevertheless. For example:

That the report is commissioned by power companies - if you read the preamble to the report itself, it acknowledges that a number of organisations including Consumer, the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority, plus several power generators, "made this study possible by providing financial support, data, or technical assistance", but states "The opinions in this report are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of organisations in the project support group."

That the article is somewhat anti-solar - the summary of the detailed, scholarly, 91 page report the article is based on states that "Electric vehicles (EVs), solar photovoltaic (PV) panels, and batteries are becoming much more affordable and accessible to consumers. This report examines the effects on greenhouse gas emissions if there is widespread uptake of these technologies in New Zealand."

Even a cursory reading (yes, I have) reveals that it is comprehensive and balanced. The article summarises the report conclusions without bias in my view.

"Nissan withdraw the Leaf from NZ" - no they didn't, they simply ran out of stock. This Stuff.co.nz article includes the following:

"Nissan New Zealand managing director John Manley said it had stopped selling the car for commercial reasons. The company had been able to sell the Leaf for $40,000 last year because it had been able to source some vehicles on good terms from Australia, where the Leaf remains on sale, Manley said. But he said that price had never been sustainable. The fact Nissan had to compete with secondhand imports from countries where original EV purchases were subsidised also impacted the economics of stocking new EVs, he said.

The decision to stop selling the Leaf was "commercial and regrettable", but Nissan could not provide an EV at the right price with features that suited the New Zealand market, he said."

In other words, Nissan have withdrawn the Leaf from New Zealand.


The comments appended to the original Herald article are representative of their ilk - biased, misinterpreted, out-of-date, selective and (of course) anonymous. The original sources are always worth chasing down to see what was really said, by whom, and with what authority.

[EVangelist]

Mar 26, 2016 12:02:03 GMT 11 hieronymous said:

You note that the comments below the article perpetuate misinformation, but use some of them uncritically nevertheless.

I didn't say the report was somewhat anti-solar, I said the article was.  I mean, read this quote from it:

"the manufacture of photovoltaic (PV) panels results in substantial embodied emissions. If the electricity needed to prise silicon from its oxide and refine it to the requisite purity came from the Manapouri power scheme, say, that would be one thing. But if it comes from a coal-fired plant in China, it is a different story.  Not only that. The widespread adoption of solar PV panels in our suburbs would be likely to crowd out the development of wind farms with lower embodied emissions. Much lower. Concept puts the life-cycle emission factor of wind power at 6.5kg of CO2 per megawatt hour, or about an eighth of solar PV."

Hardly a ringing endorsement of solar power.

As to your other points, fair cop.

[hieronymous]

Agreed, but in the context of a factual comparison between competing technologies. However, as a consumer would you choose PV panels on your roof, or a windfarm on the nearest hill? The latter don't get great press, and you could argue they need all the help they can get...

[rusdy]

Mar 24, 2016 21:07:52 GMT 11 hieronymous said:

Being closer to Oz here than to any other country, and with strong similarities,  it is easy to assume we kiwis face the same problems and will benefit from the same solutions.  A case in point - our individual response to climate change and a personal responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions reduction. But as the following link shows, it pays not to jump to conclusions....

Which makes more sense if the government invest in electric mobility (from personal to public).

Ah, New Zealand is the new 'lucky contry', blessed so much with renewables and using it as it should. When 'the sh*t hits the fan' (with climate change), it will be one of few country that still can survive due to its agriculture (Climate Change Impact on Agriculture). Plus, it's so far away from everyone else, the migration problem will hit less (unlike Europe).

Hmmm... maybe I should get a job and move there 

[hieronymous]

Join the rush - there is a lengthy queue already (even Aussies..shock, gasp)!!!
As they say, what goes around, comes around...

[jeffjl]

That article looked to me like a "you can only do one thing, what would it be" piece. Obviously the best solution for reducing greenhouse emissions in NZ would be energy efficiency, EVs, solar PV, wind and culling the sheep.

[empowerrepower]

Mar 29, 2016 13:35:10 GMT 11 rusdy said:

Mar 24, 2016 21:07:52 GMT 11 hieronymous said:

Being closer to Oz here than to any other country, and with strong similarities,  it is easy to assume we kiwis face the same problems and will benefit from the same solutions.  A case in point - our individual response to climate change and a personal responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions reduction. But as the following link shows, it pays not to jump to conclusions....

Which makes more sense if the government invest in electric mobility (from personal to public).

Ah, New Zealand is the new 'lucky contry', blessed so much with renewables and using it as it should. When 'the sh*t hits the fan' (with climate change), it will be one of few country that still can survive due to its agriculture (Climate Change Impact on Agriculture). Plus, it's so far away from everyone else, the migration problem will hit less (unlike Europe).

Hmmm... maybe I should get a job and move there 

The other day I came across this inspiring pin on the % of renewable energy in different countries.  link


Unfortunately, whoever put it together thinks that Australia is called New Zealand!  I got in touch with Mosaic, but they didn't make the infographic, even though it has their name on it.  Had a bit of a laugh at the mistake, but it makes Australia's 15% rate of renewable energy look pretty pathetic next to NZ.