Ogilvy Bernie: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Ogilvy Bernie: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7588] 
BERNIE OGILVY (United Future) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of United Future to support the Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill. The first objective of this bill is to give greater weight to the value of renewable energy and clarify that energy efficiencies should be considered regardless of the energy source. That is primarily achieved in clause 5. Although these measures effectively skew the electricity market in favour of renewables—something akin to picking winners—United Future is comfortable with that because of the natural compatibility between hydroelectricity generation and wind generation. In fact we will be urging the select committee to investigate whether the bill goes far enough towards removing the obstacles to renewables. However that does not mean that we are blind to the drawbacks inherent in renewable energy sources. 
One of the major problems with wind generation overseas has been its inherent unreliability. For example if the wind drops suddenly then another generator—usually a coal or gas-fired thermal plant—has to be ready to take over the load straight away. In countries where the bulk electricity generation capacity is provided by thermal plants that stand-by capacity requires a technique called “spinning” which is basically keeping the necessary thermal plants constantly fired up and ready to go thereby using up thermal fuels anyway. That is quite inefficient. 
In New Zealand that stand-by capacity can be provided by hydro dams rather than by thermal plants. That means that when the wind is blowing the dams can conserve their water but when the wind drops they are capable of taking up the slack quickly. In normal years such a regime could mean that a large proportion of New Zealand’s electricity needs could be supplied from relatively non-polluting renewable sources—assuming of course that we do not take into account the huge amount of land area required for wind farms. However we must remember that that does not solve the shortages faced during dry years such as this year and 2001. Because of the short-term inconsistency of most renewables such as wind power New Zealand still needs to have enough thermal generation available to take over from hydro generation when the storage lakes are low. 
I note also that the second objective of this legislation as stated in the bill is to give greater weight to considering the effects of climate change such as addressing potential increases in flood risk a rise in average sea levels and changes in typical rainfall patterns. We believe that clause 3 goes a long way towards achieving that by requiring local authorities to plan for the potential effects of climate change. That is all very well and very good and on the face of it can be seen as a strategy for dealing with the potential effects of climate change. However during the select committee process we will be seeking to ensure that the legislation does not have the unintended consequence of putting a stop to all new development especially in coastal areas. 
I also note that the third objective of this bill is to remove climate change as a consideration for local authorities when they are considering industrial discharges of greenhouse gases as those emissions are best addressed using a national mechanism. That is also something that we support. Although we believe ratification of the Kyoto Protocol ahead of our major trading partners was a big mistake for both the Government and the country as a whole we still agree that now that it has been ratified it should at least be administered consistently on a nationwide basis. The impact on the economy of the emergence of a range of differing ad hoc regional policies would be even greater than that with which we are already faced.