Save the Humans

Peak Oil: Dr Cullen Leans on Greens to Support Rail Waste

The environmentalists are excited because Dr Cullen mentioned peak oil when trying to justify the huge sums of money being wasted on a transport technology from 100 years ago,

Dr Cullen said:

Today we have to come to terms with a new set of circumstances – the emerging reality of Peak Oil and the impact rising fuel prices have on our economy. Rail’s energy efficiency has a new relevance and a new importance.

This is a ridiculous thing to say. Rail freight is dead or dying and only government regulation (to push up the cost of road freight) can save it. To the extent that rail becomes a significant part of our freight transport mix, we are all the poorer for it.

Dr Cullen doesn't exactly have a track record of encouraging the cold hard light of reason to fall on his decisions. His policy seems to revolve around who is talking rather than what they say. Treasury, National, Business owners: ignore. This is a simple case of using whatever flimsy evidence is around to justify his waste.

Still the environmentalists, grateful for any support they can get, are proud of their latest convert:

I guess everyone get there in the end. So is now a good time to talk about the billions of dollars you plan to invest on motorways for private cars rather than on public transport Dr Cullen?

Yet more evidence that environmentalists are anti-car, anti-private transport and anti anything which involves a bit of freedom for us poor plebes.

Should We Ban Buses?

It is clear to me from the small benefit and larger risks that we should ban trains. It is surprising that it hasn't been done already.

Here we have another bus crash. No one was seriously injured, unlike a recent case in Christchurch where a bus ran over a schoolgirl standing on the side of the road.

Is public transport worth the risk?

I also note that students are complaining about the cost of $2.80 to get the bus from Riccarton Mall to the university. This is only a few km, so if true it is very expensive. Considering that the average bus subsidy is 50% this means it is costing $5.60 to go a few km. If there are 4 people on board (yes, ambition I know for a ChCh bus) then that is $20 to go a km. A taxi would be half the price. A shared car for 4 flatmates would cost even less.

They also mention:

The university has fewer than 2000 carparks for its 18,000 students.

Time to build some more, I think. Canterbury University's space allocated to car parks is woeful. I used to lecture there and was always having trouble with parking. It's one of the reasons I gave it up.

Environmental Confusion

The environmentalists complain:

It is a myth that the Greens are totally anti-car, (or dairy for that
matter). We just recognise that humanity is bumping up against resource
limits and that we need to break our addiction to them and offer more
sustainable choices.

But read this -

we need to be doing more to financially incentivise people to use buses
in order to reduce congestion our roads and carbon emissions

If congestion is a problem why not just build more roads? Why drive up the cost of private motoring more than it needs to be?

And see my previous post on how public transport spending is overtaking private.

Environmentalists are being highly economical with the truth about this. When called out they claim that they are 'just offering people choices'. Then they campaign against roads, campaign for more tax spend on public transport and less on private, try to increase the cost of private transport while they subsidise public transport, etc. etc.

To claim that they are 'just offering people choices' is ridiculous in the extreme. They really shouldn't get away with this.

Trains Kill Two People Trying to Create Another

Two people and a third potential human killed by a train yesterday. We need to ban trains - the cost in terms of human lives is just too great.

(no the picture isn't related)

At Least Private Transport Doesn't Go On Strike

With the environmentalists banging on about getting us out of our cars and into their buses, it is worth remembering the Wellington bus strike. Cars can break down, but the driver seldom goes on strike.

I wonder how Mr Poneke is doing with his Snapper card?

To answer my own question, there seems to be no end of intrigue on Wellington buses. My wife's tank will be taking us skiing tomorrow. I do hope its driver doesn't go on strike...

Scrubone has details about the underlying causes.

Interesting how the left blames the lockout of workers on Wellington buses on the company, and alway omit the fact that the union president is an idiot and avowed communist who though Labour party was out to get him 2 years ago when he was student president at Vic.

Peak Oil Upon Us!

Oh dear, oil is suddenly back over $100, to $120! Was I horribly wrong?

Does this mean that the environmentalists are right, and we are going to run out of oil? Did we accidentally use heaps of the stuff just yesterday because some silly group of farmers mistook it for water?

Or are investors desperate to cling on to something real in the mad, mad financial markets?

"The market went crazy here and it looks like the weakness of the
dollar was a fuel for the sharp price increase. NYMEX October crude was
also expiring and that provoked short-covering," said Amanda
Kurzendoerfer, commodities analyst at Summit Energy in Louisville,
Kentucky.

Strangely the environmentalists are silent, but I suspect that won't last long. Our petrol is like to jump quickly if the US$ stops falling.

All I can say is: Drill, drill drill.

Public Transport Funding Overtaking Private

The environmentalists complain:

This year we are spending just under $2 billion on roading work, and only $337 million on public transport infrastructure and services combined. Even if you add in money spent on cycling and walking facilities and on travel demand management and community programmes like walking school buses and work place travel plans, that’s still only 20 cents for every dollar spent on roads.

What a load of rubbish!

Take a look at this graph of revenue from roads:

According to this the government will spend $387 million next year, not a lot more than the figure the environmentalists claim for public transport. Yet private transport takes virtually all of our goods and over 90% of our commuters to work.

I agree that this is a ridiculous mis-allocation of money. Private transport should get at least a few billion more.

MP Travel Costs are Small Beer

Some MP called Shame Jones spent $35k on domestic air tickets in 5 months. That's quite an achievement, but reflects more on the ridiculous prices the state-owned airline charges for flights which aren't booked weeks in advance. One of the main reasons I don't fly internationally with Air NZ is the nasty way they fleece me when I book a simple trip to Auckland.

Let's just imagine that MPs spent $100k each a year on travel (they don't). Multiply that by 120 MPs and you get $12m. Sounds like a lot of money, but remember that SPARC (one little tiny bit of a single govt. department) blows that each year just on its internal admin.

SPARC’s internal operating costs for 2007/08 are approximately 12% ($12.7 million) of SPARC’s total budget ($105.7 million).

Which would you rather have? Push Play and buy-your-own soccer balls at your local school, or every MP travelling around as much desired. Well maybe that doesn't sound completely clear cut, but in my view the MP travel is vastly better value for money. Let's face it - the more time these MPs spend cooking up new regulations in Wellington, the worse off we all are.

Shane Jones might even get to speak to a builder and decide to cut back on red tape. That alone would save the country tens of millions each year. Let's get these MPs spending more on travel.

Even More Oil: We Will Have to Export to Mars

This is getting ridiculous. Does anyone seriously think Peak Oil is still a serious point of view? Take a look at this graph showing the size of shale oil deposits in the USA:

Of course this oil needs to be extracted and it is much harder to get oil out of shale than out of wells in Saudi. But still, there is more oil in that green bar than the human race has consumed since we discovered it. We get to have all our oil all over again!

Oil is popping up everywhere now. Can't think why...oh yes it's because the price is sky high. Peak Oil was conceived when oil cost $10 a barrel. At $120 a barrel even getting oil from rock is viable.

Let's be clear about this. We are not running out of oil. We are running out of excuses for high oil prices. We are running out of patience with environmentalists trying to stop the drilling. We are running out of patience with high fuel taxes.

But we are not running out of oil.

Peak Oil: How Embarassing

Peak Oil has now had a few years to pan out. If the predictions had been true then we would be seeing some evidence now. But instead of course things have panned out very differently. Oil is popping up all over the world, particularly in Alaska, Brazil, USA, Arctic Circle, New Zealand. This has been helped, as economists predicted, by the fact that the price of oil is sky high.

So it is about now that we can read some of the sillier comments made a few years ago. Here is one I enjoyed:

While it would be difficult to create an airtight legal case for
impeaching George W. Bush based on his ignoring the very real threat
posed by Peak Oil, nevertheless I believe that his actions—and
inaction—in this regard constitute dereliction of duty on an
unprecedented scale.

The Energy Bulletin describes itself as:

a clearinghouse for information regarding the peak in global energy supply

It is focussed on anything to do with peak energy, including:

• energy production statistics, models, projections and analysis


• articles which provide insight into the implications of peak oil...


• a range of information to help preparedness for peak energy...


• any other subjects that could lead to better understanding the implications of an energy production peak

But strangely it doesn't focus much on the much more useful question of whether the whole thing is just a load of hot air.

Here is the case from Richard Heinberg's article:

• Peak Oil is foreseeable.

It certainly is at $10 a barrel, but at $120, it is highly, highly unlikely. At $10 a barrel I would rather roast peanuts than drill for oil. At $120 I've already starting digging in my back yard. People respond to incentives, a fact that environmentalists never fail to miss.

• The consequences are also foreseeable and are likely to be ruinous.

The consequences of a Martian invasion are similar, yet we sleep soundly at night. The point is not the consequences, so much as whether it is actually going to happen.

• The Bush administration has been repeatedly warned.

The Bush administration has been warned about the dangers of a Martian invasion, but few are bothered.

• Actions could be taken to reduce the impact, but the longer those actions are delayed, the worse the impact will be.

This is referring to changing energy sources, but this is a long term aim, not something that is possible in 5 years. Or at least not without destroying the economy. Which is perhaps where the intentions of environmentalists and the Bush administration diverge.

• The administration, rather than taking steps to mitigate these looming catastrophic impacts, has instead done things that can only worsen them.

The case for this isn't really made in the article. But I think would be a very difficult case to make.

Peak Oil Delayed Another 30 Years

The Peak Oil people must be having a hard time at the moment. President Bush seems to be going out of his way to point out the amount of oil available, and the new technology for recovering it.

Second, we should expand oil production by tapping into the extraordinary potential of oil shale. Oil shale is a type of rock that can produce oil when exposed to heat or other process[es]. In one major deposit -- the Green River Basin of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming -- there lies the equivalent of about 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil. That's more than three times larger than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. And ... if it can be fully recovered it would be equal to more than a century's worth of currently projected oil imports.

Well 800 billion barrels of oil is a lot. We use about 32 billion barrels a year. What was that about Peak Oil?

Third, we should expand American oil production by permitting exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or ANWR. When ANWR was created in 1980, Congress specifically reserved a portion for energy development. In 1995, Congress passed legislation allowing oil production in this small fraction of ANWR's 19 million acres. With a drilling footprint of less than 2,000 acres -- less than one-tenth of 1 percent of this distant Alaskan terrain -- America could produce an estimated 10 billion barrels of oil. That is roughly the equivalent of two decades of imported oil from Saudi Arabia. Yet my predecessor vetoed this bill.

It seems that Peak Oil is something that the environmentalists want to create. It is not a natural phenomenon.

This ignores Canada's oil shale deposits, by the way.

[updated to fix error]

Petrol Soon to Plunge Below $2

Times are tough for the environmentalists. Oil shows no signs of suddenly heading to $200, and despite their doomsday scenarios, the price is down to close to $2. That must really hurt...them. But as I said the rest of us are happy. Actually I don't think the environmentalists notice much - they are still talking about Peak Oil. It still hasn't peaked, guys.

We can have any amount of oil if we actually want it. All the problems we have with oil are above the ground, mostly in our heads.

Mr Obama seems convinced. Mr McCain already was.

The Low Price of Petrol

If I haven't already mentioned this, Anti-Dismal is an excellent blog for an interesting take on the economics behind many of the things in the news. We have such a poor understanding of economics in New Zealand (witness the cries of incomprehension when the price of milk goes up), so it is a very welcome blog.

Here is a discussion about how petrol is still cheap, compared to the olden days.

Oil Price Dropping Fast

Poneke may be able to afford to get out of his trolley bus after all. The environmentalists are crying in their organic soup. And the rest of us are happy.

Oil is down to US$123 from a peak of $147, and at the moment the trend is downwards.

Some suggest that part of the reason for the fall is President Bush has lifted the executive order banning offshore drilling in the US. While this is a symbolic effort, he is also pressing congress to do the same, which would have a real impact.

The White House estimates that there are 18 billion barrels of oil offshore that have not been exploited because of state bans, 10 billion to 12 billion in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil in the Green River Basin.

Wow, that's a huge amount - about 30 years of world supply, which isn't in the books at the moment. It has become clearer that environmentalists have boosted the price of oil by refusing to allow more drilling. This action is a small signal that people have had enough of this sort of market rigging, and it is time to drill.

If this continue, oil will be under US$100 again by the end of the year.

Good to see also that petrol has been dropping steadily in NZ. I am always very skeptical of people who say the oil companies here are ripping us off. Surely the rapid drop in prices is proof that the market is competitive. If only the government had some competitive pressure on its excise tax. Even if oil were free we would still pay about 70 cents in taxes.

Here's a bit of fun from Power Line:

Quite an interesting article about who is responsible for high oil prices - see Power Line.

Exxon Mobil is the largest U.S. oil and gas company, but we account for only 2 percent of global energy production, only 3 percent of global oil production, only 6 percent of global refining capacity, and only 1 percent of global petroleum reserves. With respect to petroleum reserves, we rank 14th. Government-owned national oil companies dominate the top spots. For an American company to succeed in this competitive landscape and go head to head with huge government-backed national oil companies, it needs financial strength and scale to execute massive complex energy projects requiring enormous long-term investments.

Not Peak Oil: Iraq Could Double Production

This from USA Today:

If foreign oil companies provide money and technical know-how in deals more ambitious than those now being negotiated, Iraq realistically could pump an extra 3.5 million barrels per day into the global oil market within two to three years, says Wayne Kelley, director of RSK, an oil consulting company that has studied Iraq's oil sector for clients including the U.S. and Iraqi governments.

Such an increase would more than double Iraq's current oil output — and add nearly 4% to the global supply. "That becomes a very significant amount that would help alleviate gas and energy prices," Kelley says. "Iraq truly has that capacity."

If you haven't already seen the graphs here, take a look at this one for Iraq:

At the moment Iraq is producing 2.5m barrels per day (bpd), so the graph's predictions are already wrong. But Iraq aims to more than double production to around 6m bpd in the next 3-4 years. To that end as a first step they have recently encouraged foreign il companies to come in and help.

Iraqi Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani said the government would seek to tap Western technology and capital to increase Iraqi oil production by about 60 percent, or approximately 1.5 million barrels a day, swelling Iraqi oil revenue and potentially easing tight petroleum markets where prices have doubled in the past year.

Separately, the Iraqi government is finalizing at least five short-term no-bid service contracts with major U.S. and European companies. Iraqi Oil Ministry officials said Monday that the firms were selected because most had extensive experience in Iraq's oil industry before nationalization. The precursors of Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP and Total were part of the Iraq Petroleum Co., which ran Iraq's oil industry for half a century. BP has information dating to the 1920s on Iraq's oil reservoirs.

"They have geographical studies and other analyses," said Asim Jehad, an Oil Ministry spokesman. "They can advise us, supply us with what we need and bring new technology." Chevron was also among the companies selected for the short-term contracts.

If this works out, it will be very bad news for the dopey environmentalists who think we are running out of oil. An extra 3-4% in the market, coupled with news of Brazil's exploits and more from Canada, and it could be All Over Rover.

Peak Oil Solutions - Shut Up and Pump

The environmentalists say:

Everyone agrees that there is no single technology, no single silver bullet to solve the challenges we face because of peak oil.

Oil wells? Drilling? Oil Refineries? A bit more drilling and a bit less shrilling? More pour, less Gore? Less tripe, more pipe?

It isn't that hard, guys. Any success environmentalists have at convincing us that Peak Oil is real is based on environmentalists actively restricting the supply of oil. Removing the ban in Alaska alone would double US production.

The American Spectator says it well:

For decades now, they have supported the policies of extremists who have systematically sought to shut down every major energy source for our economy. We can't drill for oil offshore, we can't drill in the frozen tundra of north Alaska, we can't even develop oil shale on the mainland. Liberals are even opposing the development of new oil discoveries in the Plains states. Meanwhile, China is now producing oil from wells in Cuban waters off the coast of Florida, selling and reaping enormous profits from oil that America should be producing.

The last new oil and gas refinery was built in the U.S. in 1976. A good example of the reason why is going on right now in Indiana. BP is constructing a $3.8 billion expansion of its already existing Whiting refinery in that state. But the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has now brought suit against BP seeking an injunction against the expansion, and fines of $32,500 for each day construction has been under way.

One argument is that even if we started drilling for oil now, we wouldn't get any increased supply, and any reduction in gas prices, for 10 years or more.

Well, let's see. On Friday, July 14, the price of a barrel of oil hit $147. On Monday, July 17, President Bush withdrew the Executive Order banning offshore drilling. That doesn't even start any new drilling because there is still a Congressional ban in place. Nevertheless, by Friday, July 21, after 4 straight days of decline, the price of oil had plummeted to $128, a decline of 13% on a symbolic action alone.

[It's now $126]

Have a read - the madness of environmentalists is pretty funny.

Peak Oil - Even I Can See it is Garbage

A kind reader sent me a link to this graph:


It aims to show that oil discovery has dropped off markedly. The reason for this, which we are all supposed to understand, is that it is getting harder and harder to find that oil.

Well maybe. But another much more obvious reason is that the price crashed. Here is the price of oil around the time of the drop in new oil discoveries:





At $20 a barrel, are you going to spend a lot of money looking for it? Not so much liquid gold as toxic waste. In 1999/2000 the price touched $10 and commentary suggested it could reach $5 - after all, the Saudis can apparently pump it out of the ground for $2.

In the end it didn't happen.

But put yourself in the shoes of an oil company. Oil prices are low and you are barely breaking even. Do you:

a. Invest a fortune in looking for new wells

b. Keep pumping oil, but cut back on exploration.

c. Cut back uneconomical wells, halt exploration.


I'd pick c. The lack of new discoveries, which is now being reversed, was due to lack of incentives. The market was saying 'no more oil please, we have enough'. Now it is saying 'OIL NOW' and you can expect the suppliers to respond. Unfortunately it takes 5-10 years to respond.

Expect a vast deluge of oil onto the market in about 5 years.

Abandon Roads - We Can't Afford to Drive

No Right Turn takes the possibility of $10 petrol a little too literally, and exclaims:

Meanwhile, the New Zealand government is still investing billions in
roads which in all likelihood none of us will be able to afford to
drive on in just a few years. Talk about a head in the sand approach.

There is even a nice graph:

I'm sure this was a facetious comment, but it is still silly. If the first world can't afford to drive, then the third world will be completely stuffed. And if they can't drive and we can't drive, then who exactly is using all this oil?

Oh I forgot. We going to suddenly run out. Brazil, New Zealand, Canada and even the USA would disagree.

1. Brazil just found a massive amount of oil
2. We did too and it could be huge
3. Iraq seems to be stabilising
4. Canada's oil reserves are now estimated at 179.2 billion barrels
   thanks to the oil sands, up from about 8 billion barrels 5 years ago -
   making them second only to the Saudis
5. A big oil find in the US of up to 15 billion barrels

If we're going to have a debate about peak oil, we must at least involve the Martian invasion somewhere. Nothing else could explain an oil price of US$900 a barrel (for petrol at $10 a litre) in 10 years time.

Hat tip: Kiwiblog

Peak Oil - Prepare for the Crash

Oh dear, not Peak Oil again. Just when you thought everyone had forgotten about that rubbish, with massive new oil finds and a price high enough to encourage my arthritic aunt to get out her drilling gear, it is back again.

There is even a novel - World Made By Hand, for those whose anti-depressant prescription is up to it.

But there seems to be plenty of oil being pumped:

For example, Ed Wallace of Business Week recently reported that “that worldwide production of oil has risen 2.5% in the first quarter, while worldwide demand has grown by only 2%. Production is expected to increase by 3.3% in the second quarter, and by as much as 4.1% by the third quarter. The net result is that the daily U.S. buffer for oil production against demand, which was a paltry 1.5 million barrels as recently as 2005, is now up to 3 million barrels in excess capacity today.”

So why is the price so high?

The answer, in a nutshell, is war and geopolitical instability in oil markets. Contrary to the claims of the champions of war and militarism, of the Wall Street speculators in energy markets, and of the proponents of Peak Oil, the current oil price shocks are caused largely by the destabilizing wars and political turbulences in the Middle East. These include not only the raging wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the danger of a looming war against Iran that would threaten the flow of oil out of Persian Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz.

I also feel that war is priced into oil. The fact is that Iran has not stopped its nuclear weapon programme, and Israel will not let it continue. The immovable object meets the irresistible force. There is going to be a big mess.

On the other hand there is surely speculation. The environmentalists are feeding this, by claiming that oil is drying up, and in the US it is drying up, partly because wells are prohibited by law. But the whole thing is completely overblown. Oil is looking very much like a bubble. The instability of the price recently suggests that no one knows what it really should be.

And this:

Mr. Yergin’s view: Not much that’s fundamental. Today’s high price
is “not about the supply and demand of oil, it’s about the supply and
demand of dollars,” Mr. Yergin said, citing a “flight to commodities”
by investors skittish about the credit-market crunch. That shift is
artificially inflating the price of oil as a hedge against inflation
and a weak dollar, he said.

Prepare for the oil crash. I recommend that environmentalists stock up on tissues. Petrol at $1.50 a litre is going to be great for humans, but bad for environmentalists.

Petrol for $10? - Get a Grip! (Updated)

It is stories like this that just emphasise how lost the environmentalists are. Wishing us out of our cars, they say things like:

An Australian report released today says the price of petrol in that country could hit A$8 ($10) a litre within the next 10 years.

They found there was likely to be a shift to hybrid cars and other forms of fuel as petrol soared to the A$8 a litre mark.

The current price of 91 octane petrol in inner Sydney is around A$1.67 ($2.12) a litre, while prices in New Zealand's main centres are around $2.19.

"The future price of oil is uncertain," Dr Wright said. "The Forum's scenario modelling shows that if oil production peaks, prices could climb as high as A$8 per litre by 2018 in the most extreme case."

Sadly, it is the environmentalists who seem to hold the key to the price of petrol. By stopping drilling, by halting oil refinery growth / building, by increasing taxes, environmentalists hope to achieve this goal.

At the moment in NZ the price of petrol is about $1.40 plus tax. For petrol to reach $10 a litre, oil would need to climb to around US$900 a barrel assuming no massive tax increases. That is beyond the hope of even Jeanette Fitzsimons. At that price, we could make oil from hair clippings.

But still we keep reading these mad messages. Are environmentalists softening us up for another tax increase, or do they plan to simply shut down oil production?

UPDATE: The environmentalists ask:

White Elephant or Easter Island Statue? Either way, the Greens have been telling it like it is for years. How many more reports need to be published before the major parties wake up?

Perhaps if one of their dire predictions actually came true we might listen more closely. Until then I think snoring through the rhetoric is the best idea.

Quick Sell the Trains - The Guardian Approves!

Someone at The Standard pointed me to this terrifying article. It seems that The Guardian approves of the state purchase of the railways.

But first they have to put the boot in:

Named after New Zealand Labour's then finance minister, "Rogernomics" was all the rage on the global new right for a time - and laid the ground for neoliberal social democratic governments like Tony Blair's - until it finally imploded amidst a litany of social and economic failures: stagnation, unemployment, bankruptcies, crime and rampant inequality.

Oh that's the cause of all our problems! We just need more socialism. Was Helen Clark in that government? It's funny reading the narritive that runs through so many of the Guardian's articles. One wonders if they recruit for people who believe this stuff, or just get the sub-editors to add it in later.

Two decades on, another New Zealand government, this time a more progressive Labour coalition headed by Helen Clark, is again at the forefront of political change - leading the revival of public ownership.

Yes, New Zealand is right up there with Venezuela. Go Hugo.

What is certain is that the Brown government's kneejerk resistance to public intervention and ownership will have to end if it is to have a hope of riding out the crisis and dealing with the new economic reality. By making a stand for progressive common sense, New Zealand has at least helped break the spell that privatisation is somehow the natural order of things in the modern world.

Either that, or New Zealand has simply left the modern world. It's not yet clear which it is.

The Car to Turn an Environmentalist Green

(pics from Left Lane News)

A 6.2 litre supercharged motor with 550 horsepower, weighing about 2 tonnes, for about US$60k. Where can I get one in right hand drive? I just dream about pulling up to the gas station in one of these.

Why Isn't the USA Self-Sufficient in Oil?

(photo credit Spin Doctor)

The USA has a pathetic 20 billion barrels of oil reserves, from what I can tell. It uses about 5 million of those a day, and imports the other 15 million it needs, mostly from Canada.

Environmentalists constantly complain about the amount of oil that the USA uses. What would they say if the USA were self-sufficient in oil?

It could happen sooner than you think. Try this:

This ignores coal to gas options which claim that Montana could have coal in the ground equivalent 1/4 of the entire Middle East reserves.

Alaska has about 10 billion barrels, if the environmentalists would let them drill.

Canada (Alberta) of course has what looks like the second largest oil reserve in the world, after Saudi Arabia. OK so maybe that is not the USA, but close enough.

So what could stop the USA becoming self-sufficient in oil? Truthfully, only environmentalists.

Auckland Traffic Problems Solved at Last

The Herald led on Saturday with a heart-warming story of how Auckland's traffic woes are at last being solved. It is becoming so expensive to drive that many people have decided not to bother. Where they are not bothering to go to work, or not bothering to head to the beach we are not sure.

Figures for last month, given to the Weekend Herald by Transit NZ, show traffic on the city's motorways in peak hours is down an estimated 3 per cent since May last year.

That translates to a reduction of more than 6000 cars a day on some of the system's busiest stretches.

The environmentalists will be well pleased - no doubt they will call for more public transport. With a bit of luck the price of petrol will keep going up and we will soon be able to travel to Auckland and drive around by ourselves. Of course there will be no one to visit, the economy having collapsed. But this is a small price to pay for the purity of abolishing private transport.

My 'Low Cost' Petrol Price Enquiry

I see that the government is about to start up an enquiry into why petrol is so expensive in New Zealand. As a public service I would like to publish my own enquiry, the result of 10 minutes' work, which might save everyone a lot of money on consultants' fees, etc.

Enquiry into the Price of Petrol in New Zealand

A. Terms of Reference

Try to work out why petrol is so expensive. Only examine things of no importance whatsoever. At all costs, avoid looking at the two main factors (the cost of oil and NZ government taxes). Perhaps try to close your eyes while doing the research, or something....

B. Research Conducted

We spoke to several people in compiling this report. Here are their comments.

Person X, dodgy looking student filling up tank: We, like, went to fill up our car, like, and it was like over $2 a litre and that's a lot of money. So being a good kiwi I like complained to the government to do something about it.

Person Y: might have been the PM, not sure. We have robust procedures in place to ensure that the state is not blamed for a problem that it created, or didn't create. By the way, good luck with the enquiry (wink)

Person Z, one of the authors of this report: Oh dear how expensive, how can I blame the environmentalists for this...?

Other research involved looking on the web to find this graph of the components of the petrol price.

C. Results

Gosh petrol seems expensive. However if you take out the cost of oil and the taxes (which are outside the terms of reference) it is actually only about 18 cents a litre. This doesn't seem to bad really.

The considered opinion of this enquiry is that 18 cents a litre is pretty cheap for petrol, and people should stop whinging. The government is doing a great job, by the way. Cheers.