Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, March 3rd, 2026 - 28 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/2/qatarenergy-worlds-largest-lng-firm-halts-production-after-iran-attacks
Maybe this should be a factor in why our govts decision to bang on ahead with a LNG terminal is ridiculous
My understanding is that the primary roposed LNG source is Australia
https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2026/02/17/lng-plan-needs-a-closer-look—the-details-don-t-bode-well.html
There would be no direct impact from Middle East sources halting production.
Of course, there might be cost increases if the rest of the world is also looking for alternatives.
Just as we're already seeing with oil price increases.
Importing *any* energy sources comes with a significant risk.
And, the interconnected world trade also has 2nd and 3rd tier impacts from disruption. A good example is that virtually the entirety of the Iranian oil exports go to China – so halting this for any significant period of time, is going to have very significant impacts on the Chinese economy and manufacturing.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/an-overview-irans-energy-industry-infrastructure-2026-02-28/
Well as long as it's only price increases that will be completely fine, Lets crack on with the terminal then
Having options in terms of fuel is generally considered to be a good thing.
Of course it is, Solar, wind, thermal, long term battery storage, and these all come with their own set of problems, but a war in another part of the world is not one of them, which shows this unbelievably useless govt is A, either stupider than the average tradesman (ie me) or B, is once again pushing us into something for the benefit of themselves or their mates (ie corrupt as fuck) or even Bella, shock horror, both
Given that NZ is not now, and will not be in the short to medium term, independent on imported energy.
Do you believe that it is better to be entirely reliant on oil and coal imports? Or to diversify into LPG as well?
Arguing for as much independence as possible (the outlined renewables) – is not the question.
For some reason, one suspects tankers supplying Iranian oil exports to China will come and go as they will.
If Iran is sinking tankers from Iraq, Saudi and UAE, I think you can just about guarantee that the US won't be allowing Iranian Oil tankers free passage.
There's currently a US battle group in the region.
But, yes, China is going to be very badly affected – and will be very keen to get this resolved.
The source is meant to be Australia. What is interesting about Australia as a source is many fold. But the big one is that they sell at international market prices, and they have a domestic shortage of gas supply with high prices. Currently some of the Aussies east coast states are starting to have to look at doing LNG importation from the same sources as we'd want to use – at international prices.
Have a look at this 'comment' by energy advocates..
https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Comment-Australia-Gas.pdf
So we're only going to get gas at essentially international market prices (ie subject to whatever idiocies are happening the Middle East or the US supply. Because we're only likely to be an occasional and very small customer, the prices that the corporations selling Aussie gas will be at a premium. We aren't a customer that they'd need to want to keep.
Somehow, I don't think that the east coast Aussie consumers and businesses are likely to be that chuffed that NZ is taken even the peanut amounts that this pack of cockups in our government are proposing.
There is a pretty strong and growing political chorus in Aussie that thinks that a large chunk of the gas in Australia should held and used in Australia. Probably at domestic prices that would lower than Methonax currently squanders about 40% of the annual production of our remaining gas at prices – which I think are really really REALLY low.
Like us, Australia has had a massive drop in petroleum and gas exploration and development over the last decade. Part of that is a regulation, but also and probably more so has been the lack of new discoveries. Not to mention the cost of developing the existing massive fields.
To give you an idea, have a look at the volumes and links about the discovery and development of the gas fields of NZ and Australia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_gas_fields#By_location
But essentially, Aussie has the same problem that we had when the Maui field and its 100 cubic kilometres of gas was discovered in 1969. It went into production a decade later after a massive investment.
The dumb arse National government had setup the exploration with a really stupid take-or-pay agreement on Maui. That is a development process that I am confident that ever stupid and short-sighted Shame Jones and his National minions would like to repeat. I'd bet that their current enthusiasm for fast-tracking gas and oil exploration has led them into the same stupid mistakes.
We couldn't use the gas ourselves because we didn't have the industry and exports to use it. So effectively it was sold cheaply for a variety of economically stupid purposes (expensive synthetic petrol when purchased oil was cheap at Motonui being a classic example) and rapidly depleted.
Overall, I'm pretty sure that it'd be easy to show that economically NZ would have been significantly better off just by not searching for oil and gas in the 1960s and 1970s.
Fortunately, we're really unlikely to find any significant or economically viable gas or oil fields in NZ. The impacting seafloor plates that we live on have been grinding any fields to depletion for a very long time.
The remaining gas reserves in NZ are currently providing 30-45% of the annual production of natural gas to Methanex. It is used to manufacture methanol as a feedstock and is sold almost everywhere except NZ. It is hard to find out what the economic returns to the country are – but they will only be minimal if you look at it as profit to the economy. Mostly when you look at anything that the government, the petrochemical industry and methanex publish, they emphasise their own revenue and profit and omit anything about its real benefit to our economy.
But overall, I'd say that it costs us a substantial subsidy from local taxpayers to have Methanex producing in NZ.
Have a read of this 2024 paper about an exit by Methanex. The key things to note are that NZ taxpayers are funding a massive subsidy in the form of 'free' emission credits to Methanex.
https://350.org.nz/files/2024/12/Methanexit-December-2024-CICTAR-350-and-CGA.pdf
It also looks like the local corporation moves almost all locally generated profit outside NZ for parent organisation 'services', 'interest' on internally generated loans, and dividends. Almost certainly this is how they cut their potential tax bill. They also appear to sell their products to their parent company at a 'transfer price'
These days they employ relatively few employees, and don't appear to make substantial taxable profits. The example in the 350.org analysis show them having a tax liability of about tenth of the dividends paid to the parent organisation.
In short Methanex is an probably always has been a parasite on the NZ economy. I'd be really interested in their provision for cleaning up their sites when their current gas contracts get summarily terminated in 2029. Perhaps we should prempt and start issuing arrest warrants for shareholders and managers now.
"The dumb arse National government had setup the exploration with a really stupid take-or-pay agreement on Maui".
The Maui deal was set up by the then Labour Government headed up by Norm Kirk. It was an excellent deal for New Zealand.
There was, for the luddites of the world, one thing about the Maui discovery that they would applaud. If we hadn't found, and developed, the Maui field we would have had a nuclear power station at a Kaipara Harbour site.
A couple of thoughts from a regular gig attendee.
Went to see Leftfield last night in Wellys. Originally for Meownui, one of the best new venues for up to 1000 crowd. Good acoustics, 4 x tiers for viewing and an upstairs area.
Ended up at Shed 6, which the kindest thing you could say about it is that it's a box. Long, skinny and only average sound.
So, for the second gig in a row, had the misfortune to be in front of folk that talked the whole way through. The best I could come up with is “there is a talking section in the bar.” Didn't work, unfortunately.
Like those that must have their phones out, their self importance is a blight on others.
Leftfield were spot on BTW.
Once again the idea that our conservatives are good managers of the economy falls into the conspiracy section.
Example A.Willis and Luxon wanting to grow the economy give tax cuts and hand outs to landlords. This money the landlords would only reinvest into themselves. Followed closely by cutting pay equity reforms that would have given billions of dollars annually into the hands of the working poor. This would be spent into the economy, locally, growing the economy.
Any comment Willis makes about the state of the economy, is clearly more to do with her qualifications in English than her abilities as a financial minister.
Example B. Luxon wants a liquid natural gas plant built at the cost of several billion making us reliant on long supply chains foreign companies and subject to price spikes. Spikes which we’re about to experience due to goings-on in the Middle East.
Our increased reliance on fossil fuel energy sources will not only cost us more to be compliant with various climate change accords but also make it harder for agricultural trade deals with our European partners
My understanding is that the proposed source of LPG was from Australia.
Thus resulting in shorter supply chains, and fewer foreign companies.
Yes, but supplied at the world market price, as you note in 1.1.
I was addressing the apparent concern from gsays over "making us reliant on long supply chains foreign companies" – which was specifically linked to the building of the LNG plant. And pointing out that this risk is lower for LNG, than it is for petroleum products.
Price spikes are the same risk for all imported fuel sources. Or do you somehow think that agricultural diesel prices are not also going to boom? Not to mention fertilizer…..
We do not have now (and would not have had, even if the holy grail of Onslow had broken ground) – energy independence.
Yes, but despite the LNG being supplied within the local region, it would be at the world market price, as you noted in 1.1.
His point being that it might well now cost more than we expected, could well be true.
And? I was correcting the mis-statement that it was dependent on long supply chains.
It is actually unlikely that Australia fields would want to supply us. Their most productive and low-cost fields are mostly in the north of Western Australia and do pretty well selling northwards. I wrote a comment about why that is further up – along with a link that amongst other things described why WA gas is what we'd want.
Just to give you an idea of the relevant distances. The distance from Perth (Fremantle) to Whangarei is around 2900 nautical miles – roughly 5400 kilometres. To Taranaki port is closer to 3000 nm.
The distance from Perth to Singapore is around 2100 nm. There are a shit-ton of industry serving ports that are already massive customers. And that is before you look at the Aussie eastern states. That is around the same sea distance as Perth to Sydney – also around 2100 nm.
Even if we could source from north of Queensland, the distance from Brisbane (a long way south of the various major developed fields) to Taranaki is about 1300 nm. From Burnie port in Tasmania (bass strait fields) to Taranaki is also around 1300nm.
Shipping to NZ is just a nuisance because it is going in the wrong direction – away from the major customers like those in , and we're only going to be interested in relatively small amounts of gas. Besides, the gas carriers from WA, Tasmania and Queensland will be wanted to fill up aussie eastern states, and they're a hell of a lot closer.
Tell me – do you ever look up any information or think before you blat out your opinions about reality? Finding out sea distances and where Aussie gas fields is pretty trivial to look up.
And if you did that, then I wouldn't have a chance at routinely pointing out your opinions should be treated as smelly as milking shed effluent.
There's also an interesting article on Substack on another LNG issue:
See here: https://substack.com/@deirdrekent689265/p-187609798
Given that the proposed source of the LPG for NZ was Australia – I don't really think that shipments are likely to 'fail to reach Southern Hemisphere ports'.
It is, of course possible, that they'll be gazumped before they even leave port.
But it's a heck of a long way from Australia to Europe – especially via the Cape of Good Hope (Suez is not likely to be an option – due to the risk factor of a hot war in the region). The spot price would have to be astronomically high to make the change worth it.
Heh, Aussie eh, what could possibly go wrong.
After all their supermarkets and banking interests are two of the biggest exporters of dollars out of our economy.
Looking at our economy more broadly, making our electricity network more diverse in the form of solar, solar and battery, geothermal, pumped hydro, wind etc, will have a way larger, long term, net positive on our finances than Luxon's gas folly.
I am already hearing whispers that the contract is going to line a select group's pockets. Cough cough corruption cough cough. In my opinion.
Back to electricity, don’t just take my word for it.
“New Zealand is one of the first countries to reach what’s called the ‘electrification tipping point’, where households can save money and also significantly reduce their emissions by electrifying their appliances and vehicles. On average, homes currently using gas appliances and petrol vehicles could save around $1,500 per year at current interest rates and around $4,500 per year with a low-interest loan if they bought electric equivalents and got their electricity from a combination of rooftop solar, home battery and New Zealand’s already highly renewable grid.”
Rewire Aotearoa Report.
https://www.rewiring.nz/electric-homes-report
The fact that (some) households can switch to renewables (and theoretically save money and reduce emissions) – doesn't negate the fact that NZ is currently dependent on energy imports in some format. Currently oil, coal and LPG.
The political ginger group you quote, seems to carefully avoid addressing this issue.
Goodness – such a diatribe against Australia. Do you think they are more corrupt than any of our other international energy sources?
JD Vance owns what is happening, but Trump will get the credit if it works and blame if it does not.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360945881/jd-vances-silence-iran-strikes-starting-get-very-loud
https://bsky.app/profile/clarajeffery.bsky.social/post/3mg4ani3h3s2c
"If the situation becomes that the countries with the most power can do whatever they like regardless of what international law says, that's very bad news for a small country like New Zealand." – Chris Hipkins. Exactly.
(Seymour) said as a result of the strikes, Iranian girls will have an opportunity to “dress as you like, go to school, do things that are normal rights that have been withheld from them by this regime”. – Oh puleeze.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/588470/opposition-leader-chris-hipkins-says-us-israel-strikes-illegal
And when they get bombed on their way to school they’ll be bombed in proper western style frocks
lol
@bentorkington.bsky.social
Luxon "misspoke". Three times. With prepared notes. Said the same thing three times followed by "I don't know how I could be any clearer".
That kind of misspoke.
https://bsky.app/profile/bentorkington.bsky.social/post/3mg4eodefes2k
I cant look at yr link, it's only for signed in folk.
Any clues as to what it's about?
Edit, ahh I see.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360945990/luxon-softens-stance-after-backing-any-action-stop-iran-getting-nuclear-weapons
Obviously…