Mining and Power Supply Security

GoldThere has been much obfuscation by Labour,the Greens, and their associated paid lap-bloggers about mining. Their articles with pictures of Milford sound and the such are pretty much lies, from the picture to the text. The picture accompanying this post are far more accurate.

The reality is that the amount of land we are talking about is tiny, really tiny. Labour and the Greens want New Zealand to be poor. New Zealand?s onshore minerals are estimated to be worth about $180 billion, excluding coal, oil and gas, 12 times Fonterra?s total assets. Labour and the Greens want to leave it there, thus they must want us to be poor. Then again have you ever seen a rich socialist country? Socialists need people to remain poor, that way they are dependent like a new born baby on the tit of the government.

Matthew Hooton wrote an unusually perspicacious article in the NBR on Friday. He gets right to the nub of the nonsense the poor-mongers dollop out.

New Zealand?s land mass of 27 million hectares is greater than that of the UK.? A third of it ? nine million hectares ? is owned by DoC.? According to the leaks, just 7000ha is even to be considered for mining, much less than one-thousandth of the conservation estate and an infinitesimal amount in terms of New Zealand?s total land mass.? It?s roughly the same area as is currently planted in olives.

Completely excluded for consideration, it seems, are the wilderness areas most loved and visited by New Zealanders and tourists, including Westland, Aoraki/Mt Cook, Tongariro, Abel Tasman and the enormous Fiordland National Park.? The main focus appears to be Paparoa, where mining is already underway in some of the 74 mining ventures approved by the Labour government under Helen Clark.

Well now, isn’t that interesting? The actuality of the poor-mongers arguments is so far from their pictures, which are usually of Westland, Aoraki/Mt Cook, Tongariro, Abel Tasman and the enormous Fiordland National Park that they are actually lying to New Zealand. The total amount of land under consideration is a paltry amount.

Not only that we see the hypocrisy of Labour who thought it was a good idea to approve 74 mining concessions on their watch but now that National is the government it is precious scared taonga that can’t be touched. The Greens too are are complicit in this deception because they kept Labour in power even though they never got to enjoy the fruit of keeping them there.

So dramatically more productive is mining compared with other land uses that even his modest 7000ha proposal would earn New Zealand around $1.225 billion a year.? That compares with, say, $25 million from a similar amount of dairy land or the $3.5 million in total sales from olives.

It is true that olive groves are prettier than even the modern surgical mining Mr Brownlee appears to have in mind, but neither has the environmental impact of a dairy farm let alone the gross aesthetic pollution caused by the green movement?s beloved wind farms ? the recent addition to New Zealand?s landscape most likely to undermine our enjoyment and love of it, and the experience of our tourists.

That is a massive difference in in extraction value compared to our biggest earner, dairying. Olive’s seem better suited to the Mediterranean than wasting our time growing them here.

Recreation facilities made in used open pit mineMining too provides a better end game than any other industry. When the mine is finished, particularly an Open cast mine, there are many options available to us in cleaning up what appears to be a barren wasteland. Replanting is an option, filling up the big holes with water and maintaining a new lake for both water storage and and recreational facilities, kids would relish the chance of learning to sail their Optimist dinghies in such beautiful surrounding. We could even require the miners to put it back the way it was.

There is another option too. Assisting us to secure our power supplies in a meaningful way. In the UK the Tories have come good and pledged to allow a new nuclear power station to be opened every 18 months to address the threat of a power shortage.

It is really sensible if you believe in Peak oil, really sensible if you believe in Global Warming, and that really gets the Green knickers in a right twist right up their arse. The Resource Management Act makes the damming of rivers for nigh on impossible even when Water is one of our most abundant resources. So we must consider other options.

Now think about nuclear power in conjunction with mining. You just can’t lose. We have dug a really big hole in the ground, we need to fill it with something, what better way to utilise what Labour and the Greens will tell you is dead ground now, never to bloom again, than to fill it with nuclear power plants. At the same time we move from not only the benefits of the mining but also to a secure power supply. The mining can even pay for it. The flow of cheap electricity would make New Zealand attractive again for bringing lucrative value add industry to our shores.

As Matthew Hooton says about the mining;

New Zealand?s balance of payments would be brought into permanent surplus and the long-standing problem of the imbalance between our external and domestic performance instantly resolved. Consequently, throughout the economy, the cost of capital would fall, spurring investment, new ventures and jobs.

the same can be said about a secure power supply. It really is a win/win solution