Gas isn’t the solution, proper regulation of our electricity market is
The Government are already lying to you about how their bullshit Gas Tax isn’t really a Tax…
Is it a tax? Is it a levy? Government stumbles over new charge to pay for LNG
Stuff
…you’ll be feeling it in your power Bill next year! Tell me if it doesn’t feel like a Tax then!
The fact is the Government are once again lying to you because they KNEW the cost would be passed straight onto you the consumer…
NZ Herald
…they knew it was a tax, lied about it and hoped you wouldn’t notice blowing a billion dollars on making your power bills even more painful!
It’s not just the debate over whether it is a tax or not, it’s the reality that it is the absolute opposite thing we should be doing in regards to climate change…
LNG terminal decision is dirty, dumb and expensive – Greenpeace
The Government’s decision to pursue an imported liquefied natural gas terminal has triggered fierce backlash from environmental groups, with Greenpeace accusing ministers of locking New Zealand into higher power prices, greater climate pollution, and unnecessary fossil fuel dependence despite clear evidence that renewables are cheaper and sufficient.
Greenpeace condemns LNG terminal as costly fossil fuel subsidy
Greenpeace is slamming the Luxon government’s announcement it will build a liquid natural gas (LNG) import terminal, calling it a dirty, dumb and expensive decision that will leave New Zealanders subsidising more climate pollution through higher electricity bills.
The decision comes despite the expected high cost and high emission intensity of imported LNG. Building the LNG terminal is expected to cost $1 billion, while the cost of imported LNG is expected to be around twice as much per gigajoule as gas from existing onshore reserves.
Higher power bills and climate pollution
“Electricity consumers will pay a Luxon Tax on their electricity bills to subsidise the fossil fuel industry,” says Greenpeace Executive Director Russel Norman.
“Instead of investing in clean energy, this Government is choosing to double down on the very fossil fuels that are driving both high power prices and extreme weather events.
“Every additional tonne of fossil fuels burned makes climate change worse. This LNG decision is yet another fossil fuel subsidy from the Luxon government that will mean more floods, storms, and climate fuelled damage.
“It makes no sense to rely on imported and expensive fossil fuels when we have abundant, cheap energy sources right here at home with wind and solar.”
Reports show renewables are cheaper and sufficient
A report by MBIE in 2024 found that there was no need for new fossil fuels to maintain New Zealand’s energy security out to 2050 and reported that wind and solar are the cheapest sources of new electricity generation.
Meanwhile, a 2023 Concept Consulting report found onshore gas reserves alone can supply all needs out to 2050 if Methanex, the company using between one third to a half of the country’s gas to make methanol for export, were to close, which it inevitably will as gas prices rise.
Climate action rolled back under Luxon Government
“This Government has made the energy and climate crises worse by dismantling nearly every initiative to decarbonise the energy system. They ditched the Government Investment in Decarbonising Industry fund, the NZ Battery Project, and the Gas Transition Plan.
“Businesses are closing because the Government believed its own nonsense that the oil and gas exploration ban was the cause of high electricity prices. It never was and the LNG subsidy will solve nothing,” says Dr Norman.
“They even got rid of the Climate Emergency Response Fund set up to help communities recover from climate disasters. Now, they are planning to use more public money to bankroll fossil fuels for more climate emergencies.
“The Government should be investing in cheap, renewable wind and solar, backed by more storage and demand response, not exposing the country to a volatile global LNG market and locking us into more polluting fossil fuels.”
Greenpeace
Bernard Hickey make the case that we could be spending this money far better…
However, the Government chose not to compare this LNG import option against investing the same amount in solar panels and batteries to allow the hydro lakes to be used as storage, choosing instead to only compare LNG against new coal and diesel ‘peaker’ plants. It’s also choosing to pay for the LNG terminal through a type of hire-purchase ‘lease’ agreement that increases the $1 billion up-front cost to $2.7 billion over the 15-year life of the facility, even though it may never be used if there is no dry year.
Why not choose to spend that $2.7 billion on grid-scale and residential solar panel and battery installations that would now create four Lake Benmores’ worth of storage and generation, which would be enough to power over 2.5 million homes?
…this is being sold to you as making your power prices cheaper while dealing with climate change but it’s going to cost you more, and spend the right money on the wrong things.
The issue here isn’t to make more climate polluting electricity generation, it is to properly regulate and nationalise the electricity market while rapidly moving to full electrification.
How much must you hate Jacinda to make this fuckwittery preferable?
