Some protest...

[Oscar]

The tree-hugging, whale-fondling, oxygen-deprived brigade, spurred on by a profit-driven multi-national corporation (Greenpeace) are not at all worried (yet) about where the profits go from offshore oil and gas production. They'll move on to that once their current concerns get shot down in flames.

They have onanised themselves into a lather about their perceived risks of inadvertent oil discharges, based on recent events such as the grounding of the Rena and the really big oil slicks in the Gulf of Mexico.

What they are choosing to ignore are facts, science, logic and reason. Offshore oil production is extremely low risk -- less than 0.001%. There are thousands of production sites around the world, many of which are in particularly difficult locations, such as the North Sea, Bass Strait and Torres Strait. Oil companies know what they're doing, and have robust systems in place to minimise risks and prevent spillage or leakage.

The biggest environmental risks associated with sea-borne oil come from vessels colliding, grounding or sinking, not from exploration companies boring holes in the ocean floor.

Yup.

Also the Greenpeace study was based on high pressure (1800psi) heavy crude being the culprit (as in the Gulf of Mexico).
There has never been any high pressure dark crude found off NZ.
Basically we've only ever found gas and small quantities of light sweet crude at much lower pressures.

But don't let the facts get in the way of some good propaganda...

[Zedder]

Human ingenuity is indeed limitless. So too is human greed when it comes to cutting corners/bending rules to make a buck. It wasn't the lack of engineering nouse that caused the deepwater horizon blowout. Just like it wasn't poor engineering/failure/lack of information that parked the Rena on Astrolabe reef. Was it a lack of ingenuity that caused the leaky homes crisis?\

Mankind has been ingenious since forever, and in our last big resource grab, we ended up with forests devoid of Kauri trees, and rivers and creeks filled with cyanide. All done with the latest technology and with the local economy in mind and at heart.

What will be the real benefit to our economy? Do these companies hire locally? No. Do they spend their profits in their area of operation? No? Look at how rich Papua New Guinea has become from all of the resources drawn from them by multi-nationals over the years.

Do you think this project will make your fuel any cheaper?

We could rather be encouraging companies that are interested in developing fuel & chemicals from forest biomass (trees), we are certainly well placed to do so so, and there is a lot happening in this field.

The only winner in the NZ oil production game is the Gubbermint. Hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties and company taxes per year come their way.

I recently read that the US biogas company KiOR has just received a USD$100 million injection of funds. Interestingly also, the US Congress has a requirement that gasoline companies buy the product. Good news.

[awa355]

Yeah he just drives around the ocean, burning fossil fuels and contributing to the depletion of our fish stocks while calling himself an "environmentalist". Oh-kaaay...

A bit like motorcyclists riding around burning fossil fuels for no real reason other than we want to and, if we want, we can call ourselves "enviromentalists" for burning less fuel than cars. At least, Brian brings home a fish to eat most days.

[Milts]

Is'nt it amazing how these greenie teleban bastards all drive to these protest sites in their clapped out old bombs that blow smoke everywhere and drink fuel like there's no tomorrow and have the cheek to protest about issues that generally contribute to the NZ economy. The same economy that funds their dole payments. Hypocracy at its best.

Driving an old uneconomical care is significantly more efficient than building an entirely new car from scratch.

[Robbo]

Driving an old uneconomical care is significantly more efficient than building an entirely new car from scratch.

Regardless of weather it is or it is'nt, this is about Hypocricy and not Efficientcy.

[Smifffy]

Regardless of weather it is or it is'nt, this is about Hypocricy and not Efficientcy.

Clearly it ain't about spelling, grammar or punctuation.

[puddytat]

Well I think we'll get out there quite comfortably in this.....

[BMWST?]

The tree-hugging, whale-fondling, oxygen-deprived brigade, spurred on by a profit-driven multi-national corporation (Greenpeace) are not at all worried (yet) about where the profits go from offshore oil and gas production. They'll move on to that once their current concerns get shot down in flames.

They have onanised themselves into a lather about their perceived risks of inadvertent oil discharges, based on recent events such as the grounding of the Rena and the really big oil slicks in the Gulf of Mexico.

What they are choosing to ignore are facts, science, logic and reason. Offshore oil production is extremely low risk -- less than 0.001%. There are thousands of production sites around the world, many of which are in particularly difficult locations, such as the North Sea, Bass Strait and Torres Strait. Oil companies know what they're doing, and have robust systems in place to minimise risks and prevent spillage or leakage.

The biggest environmental risks associated with sea-borne oil come from vessels colliding, grounding or sinking, not from exploration companies boring holes in the ocean floor.

tell that to the people of Louisiana

[Milts]

Regardless of weather it is or it is'nt, this is about Hypocricy and not Efficientcy.

My mistake. I thought you were calling them hypocrites for being uneconomical, which would be incorrect as they were utilising the most economical method. Clearly you were calling them hypocritical for another reason which I failed to understand.

[Robbo]

Clearly it ain't about spelling, grammar or punctuation.

Grammar "ain't".. Geeze Smiffy, we both must have gone to the same school..

[mashman]

My mistake. I thought you were calling them hypocrites for being uneconomical, which would be incorrect as they were utilising the most economical method. Clearly you were calling them hypocritical for another reason which I failed to understand.

If they use things that are made of oil, then how dare they protest oil being removed from the ground. Total hypocrisy.

[Road kill]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9324...f-consultation

Raglan Fishing Charters' Brian Hooker is worried about the environmental impact on marine life and is threatening to lead a fleet of boats to picket the Anadarko vessel the Noble Bob Douglas when it arrives at the end of next month.

I hope they are all either sailing or rowing out there.... Because where do they think the fuel for their boats and cars comes from?

That's a bit black an white man.

We all live in the modern world an none of us have a say in that,but the fact we're consumers ourselves shouldn't be enough to stop people protesting against what they believe is bad for the environment as it is today.

We can't change the damage done already but we should stop it getting worse when ever we can.

Raglan fishing charters are like many other charters,they don't get out everyday,what they do is sustainable,their profits go a longway toward the local community and their not destroying anything that you and I don't also have a thumb in..

Shooting the messenger is a pretty mean thing.

[The Reibz]

They plan on drilling 1500m under the ocean. Incase there are people that don't know shit about the ocean around, that is around 1440m past safe diveable depth. So if there is a blowout there is no way to repair it. Lets see whos first to have a winge when the entire west coast of NZ is covered in oil and all the snapper die.

This country used to mean something. 40 years ago we were standing up against big corporations and countries. World leaders in it actually, told the yanks to stick it up their arses. We should be building more wind farms and hydro plants. Not drilling for oil, oil is old news. Oh wait John sold off all our assets, there goes that idea.

Time to go stock up on the KY for the next 50 years while we get our arses raped by the rest of the world.

[Tazz]

They plan on drilling 1500m under the ocean. Incase there are people that don't know shit about the ocean around, that is around 1440m past safe diveable depth. So if there is a blowout there is no way to repair it. Lets see whos first to have a winge when the entire west coast of NZ is covered in oil and all the snapper die.

This country used to mean something. 40 years ago we were standing up against big corporations and countries. World leaders in it actually, told the yanks to stick it up their arses. We should be building more wind farms and hydro plants. Not drilling for oil, oil is old news. Oh wait John sold off all our assets, there goes that idea.

Time to go stock up on the KY for the next 50 years while we get our arses raped by the rest of the world.

Yup. Look at Aus and their mining. The bulk of the money goes to China and now the Chinese are stockpiling a lot of the resources mined too XD The buggers are even putting Tungsten in their gold. If you're going to rip all this stuff out of the ground you'd at least think you'd do it yourself and put some of the profits back into the place/make sure it is done correctly.
When you get offshore companies rocking in it is the all about the bottom line, not the long term.

What they are choosing to ignore are facts, science, logic and reason. Offshore oil production is extremely low risk -- less than 0.001%. There are thousands of production sites around the world, many of which are in particularly difficult locations, such as the North Sea, Bass Strait and Torres Strait. Oil companies know what they're doing, and have robust systems in place to minimise risks and prevent spillage or leakage.

Why do you think it is low risk man? It is because of people standing up against it.
If they were just let swoon in and do as they please it would be the most cost effective methods used, not the safest.

People are just so quick to roll over and take it these days.

[Paul in NZ]

That's a bit black an white man.

We all live in the modern world an none of us have a say in that,but the fact we're consumers ourselves shouldn't be enough to stop people protesting against what they believe is bad for the environment as it is today.

We can't change the damage done already but we should stop it getting worse when ever we can.

Raglan fishing charters are like many other charters,they don't get out everyday,what they do is sustainable,their profits go a longway toward the local community and their not destroying anything that you and I don't also have a thumb in..

Shooting the messenger is a pretty mean thing.

No more black and white than the protesters and lets be fair you have a pretty black/white record in previous posts. Besides these discussions do better if you take a stance and see what happens

Charter fishers are some of the worst offenders. Look at what happens when they take out big groups and each person has a limit bag. 10 on the boat and everyone expects the limit to take home and everyone of them thinks they are being responsible fishers - collectively its a nightmare.

AND they are outside the legislation in that they take commecial (or near commercial) quantities and don't have to report catch or limit themselves to a quota like the commercial guys do...