A quick note to say that this blog had a bit of a meltdown during an upgrade and had to be rebuilt. It may take a while to restore all the various options that were included before. Thanks for your support.
One of the joys of open source is that there are often multiple version upgrades within a short period of time. It doesn’t always pay to have the latest version and it is always a great idea to test first.
We also took the opportunity to strengthen security measures as any high traffic site attracts interest. Everything is back working better than before now.
The paper was commissioned by a government arts funding agency- so many of the conclusions are pointed at them. However there are wonderful little gems everywhere - try this understatement from the Exec Summary.
“The entire idea of public broadcasting may change in future, with its core concepts becoming more at home on the internet, with its low barriers to entry, interactive potential and increasing reach.”
As expected the authors work through summary comment from the background survey which quantifies and qualifies some of the changes that we are seeing. The document is about 40 pages long and easy to read. It also chronicles the shift from broadcasters presentation mode towards greater engagement via websites and other media outlets.
It discusses the much greater needs for brand extension in all directions, especially by broadcasters. It also indicates a huge need for reinvention by “NZOnAir” of its policies and strategies. NZ On Air needs to be able to fund internet content which requires a change to the broadcasting Act (see conclusions on p.39)
It also confirms that RadioNZ (for example) with 165,000 audio on demand items and more than 100,000 podcasts (in July) + live audio streams and much greater website traffic has been relatively successful in making this kind of transition.
Other topics include the music industry, copyright and the ongoing impacts of all types of digital content that has been unbundled from the physical distribution food chains of days gone past.
The discovery of music (and other content) has been dramatically expanded as the reach and ability of digital formats to transform outcomes is infinitely more flexible than the business models, businesses and thinking of the historical business foodchains that were once the market makers.
The new “taste makers” are very active participants and consumers of online life as supported by the survey.
“A survey of more than 800 regular internet users conducted for this paper found that nearly three-quarters said their TV viewing had declined, with 90% of those saying they had put the additional free time into “general internet use”. Nearly all viewed internet video, in a wide range of settings.”
As the discussion paper notes
“The same technologies that helped turn the public into surprisingly sophisticated producers of news also make them more demanding, and vocal, consumers.“
The comments refer to the huge changes at the BBC and that is also where the we’re all in this together” line comes from, not a song from a current musical but that doesn’t hurt.
“NZ On Air has posted We’re All in This Together: Public Broadcasting in the Digital Age, a discussion paper I wrote with the assistance of Andrew Dubber. It’s big — 17,000 words in a 235KB PDF — and it took a long time to finish, but
I’m quite pleased with it.
As part of the research (and the deliverables), you may recall that I ran a survey to gather ideas about the future of public broadcasting. More than 800 people, from Scoop and Thing, but mostly from Public Address, participated, and there are some great comments on it. Just click the “view” button to read them.
The comments are worth investing some time on and some are included in the main report or in the appendix. The survey itself came from 3 high profile websites - Throng, Public Address and Scoop.
“The intention was not to create a survey representative of the general population, but to capture the habits and views of the most active new media consumers.”
Besides the survey participants and Russell it is worth highlighting the other author- Andrew Dubber. He is the Degree Leader for Music Industries at UCE Birmingham, UK. He is a senior lecturer and researcher with a particular interest in online music, radio and new media technology; and an engaging writer and communicator.
He is also responsible for The 20 things You Must Know About Music Online which is useful for all businesses not just music ones. Many of the “20 things”* are also directly relevant to this Broadcasting discussion paper. (*21 now)
For example here are 5 that I find particularly useful.
6. Web 2.0: Forget being a destination — become an environment. Let your customers tag and sort your catalogue. Open up for user-generated content. Your website is not a brochure — it’s a place where people gather and connect with you and with each other.
7. Connect: Learn how to tell a story, and learn how to tell it in an appropriate fashion for web communication. Think about how that could be translated for both new media and mainstream PR outlets.
12. Distributed Identity: From a PR perspective, you are better off scattering yourself right across the internet, rather than staying put in one place. Memberships, profiles, comments, and networks are incredibly helpful.
15. RSS: Provide it, use it and teach it. Relying on people to come back to visit your website is ultimately soul destroying. So is always making more content all the time. RSS is the single most important aspect of your site. Treat it as such - but remember it’s still new for most people. Help your audience come to grips with it.
20. Forget product — sell relationship: The old model of music business is dominated by the sale of an individual artefact for a set sum of money. iTunes is still completely old school. The new model is about starting an ongoing economic relationship with a community of fans.
The Public Broadcasting paper seeks to help a government agency re-invent itself and to remain relevant. Dubbers “20 things” paper is ostensibly focussed on the music industry however both papers offer useful insights for all of us.
I’m hoping as many as possible will read the whole (NZ Energy Strategy) document but I’m guessing that won’t happen. Given that 86% of NZ oil consumption is used by the transport sector, the transport implications are worth looking at more closely. However from a climate change perspective “Greenhouse gas emissions from domestic transport (air, land and sea) make up about 18 per cent of New Zealand’s total emissions.”
Here is an excerpt from the Part 2 - Actions -Transport section 7 on “Resilient, low carbon transport” (quotes from Direction on p33.) since that is the area where most of us will feel the impact first. Sections in Italics are my emphasis.
There has to be some business opportunities here and also some real debates over planning assumptions. Also many transport companies are really single mode with a specialty and most of their investment in road, water or rail modes when it looks like greater flexibility will be required.
“Transport emissions currently represent around half of emissions from the energy sector, and are growing at an unsustainable rate. Bold action is required. The government is committed to building momentum in the adoption and uptake of sustainable transport measures and has taken an in-principle decision to halve domestic transport emissions per capita by 2040. (14)
A low carbon transport future scenario to 2050 has been established that reflects possible behavioural changes, travel demand management, improvements in vehicle efficiency and uptake of alternative low carbon fuels. (15)
The challenge is to ensure we are well placed to commence the transition to this low carbon transport future. There are many initiatives by both local and central government to manage private vehicle travel demand by improving urban design and promoting use of less carbon-intensive modes such as walking, cycling and public transport. We believe that, over time, significant demand reductions compared to business as usual can be achieved by building on current initiatives.
In the low carbon scenario, we have also assumed a significant reduction in the kilometres travelled by large vehicles through diverting freight from road transport to coastal shipping or rail, raising average loads of trucks and improving distribution practices.
I have been working on a project in the Transport sector and I have been stunned by the high number of very large trucking companies outside the main centres. They are major businesses with 100+ staff in some cases making them very large companies in the NZ context. According to the Road Transport Forum the links between GDP and trucking activity appear to be finely balanced and quite significant*.
For Coastal shipping there is a “Coastal Sea Freight Strategy” document which is being prepared. (See page 48 for a table which shows the linkages between these strategies.)
The Energy Strategy envisages changes to the distribution transport mix so while similar results come from other transport modes it would be smart not to underestimate the impacts of even small changes. (*NZRF Stats are mostly based on 2003 figures and need to be updated)
Previously they have been beneficiaries of a rail network that was trashed by private owners and run down especially in the 1980’s. The National Rail Strategy (NRS) mentions 3 significant extensions that will help change the transport mix. There has been some progress on Marsden Point and a similar dairy related project at Waitoa has been successful but …
– a new branch line to the port at Marsden Point (still being negotiated)
– a new branch line at Clandeboye (to serve the dairy factory directly)
– a short spur line to service the dairy factory at Edendale.
The NRS notes that rail remains the safest form of land transport and arguably the least polluting. It also notes rail’s advantages in terms of energy efficiency. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority says rail freight consumes 200 Watt hours/tonne km compared with 810 Wh/tonne km for trucks. This will become a critical issue as renewable sources of energy diminish. from Ontrack Nov 2005
Here are some charts on the mix between road and rail. The local charts don’t go back before 1990 when I recall rail had a higher proportion of on the distribution market. The source is the Road Transport Forum which is appears to be a lobby group for truck companies, however they make some good points such as:
* Most freight travels less than 100 kilometres. Rail, which is best suited to hauling bulk items 300 kilometres or more, is less fuel and cost efficient over such relatively short distances.
* Rail with its inflexible timetables and restricted network can’t provide the personalised, door-to-door, on-demand service the modern truck delivers. It simply doesn’t go where much of the freight goes and when the customer wants it.
* Livestock, perishable items such as groceries, fruit and vegetables, refrigerated and dangerous goods, like LPG, aren’t suited to the repeated transhipping rail requires.
* The risk of breakage and pilfering is significantly lessened.
Managing this transition will have major impact on agriculture for example. I doubt that many road users want to see larger loads on trucks (does that means larger trucks?) and what does improving distribution practices mean. On page 52 of the NZES “7.5.2 Land and marine freight movement” there is some recognition that switching modes is not so easy, however investing $1.4b (page 51) on rail over the next 6 years should help.
There are also hidden congestion costs that especially penalise road based transport.
For example, there was an Unlimited story last year on one of the largest container moving trucking company which now does (<75%) as much as possible of its work at night because of excessive road congestion which already add $m to the price of distribution. This is from the Night Owls story.
If you head to most businesses at around 5pm they’ll be starting to wind down the day’s activities. But after five at Tapper Transport is when the action really gets going. The transport company, which runs the country’s biggest container unpacking operation, earns 75% of its $22 million annual revenue at night. Most of its business is delivering export containers to the wharves and picking up import containers to deliver elsewhere.
“Our whole business erupts into activity after everyone else goes to bed,” says director Simon Tapper.
Why? Blame Auckland’s roading congestion. The 28km round trip to pick up containers from the Ports of Auckland wharves in the central city to Tapper’s Penrose warehouse takes two hours during peak daytime traffic; the same trip takes just 45 minutes at night. That daytime trip takes about 40% longer than it did five years ago…..
Tapper says roading congestion is a difficult issue because although it directly impacts the company’s bottom line, it’s not easy to convince customers that it is a tangible cost in the same way you can with diesel price rises or inflation.
And it’s only going to get worse.
A report commissioned by the Road Transport Forum estimates the amount of freight being moved around New Zealand will double in the next 20 years. Rail will pick up some of that growth but it accounts for only 11% of the mix. The rest is transported by trucks so that means we’re likely to see twice as many trucks on the roads in future.”
Back to the energy strategy
The low carbon scenario assumes a 20 per cent improvement in the overall efficiency of the vehicle fleet by 2050, which is based on the technological improvements available from fleet turnover.
Diesel-fuelled cars are, on average, 30 per cent more effi cient than their petrol equivalents. We expect half of all internal combustion cars purchased by 2050 to be fuelled by diesel, which will be well suited to use of biodiesel.
There will be an obvious upwards impact on the price of Diesel powered cars.
In this scenario, the greatest reductions in carbon emissions from transport are the result of increased use of biofuels, electricity and hydrogen. Each fuel source has significant technical challenges, so no one source is a comprehensive solution. For example, electric vehicles are unlikely to be as useful for the heavy fleet.
The Royal Society of New Zealand reports that “New Zealand has enough land to be more than self-sufficient in biofuels”. Improvements in production technologies will further improve the viability of second and third generation biofuels and allow a Biofuels Sales Obligation well beyond the current level. (16)
The low carbon scenario estimates that, by 2020, 25 per cent of liquid fuels used in transport will be derived from renewable sources, and 85 per cent by 2050.
Major vehicle manufacturers (17) recently made a commitment to commercially develop electric cars, with reports suggesting that these may be available from as early as 2010. Our scenario assumes electric vehicle sales reach five per cent of market share in 2020, followed by a period of rapid growth that reaches a plateau of 60 per cent by 2040.
Hydrogen-powered vehicles have a similar performance to fossil-fuelled vehicles, and substantial international research is being carried out into addressing the major technological challenges involved in using hydrogen as a transport fuel. The scenario speculates that 25 per cent of New Zealand’s light vehicles could be hydrogen powered by 2050.”
I’d like to be that enthusiastic about hydrogen based cars but many of the practicalities seem like that one could take longer.
Footnotes
14) Relative to 2007 emissions per capita.
15) 2020: Energy Opportunities, Report of the Energy Panel of the Royal Society of New Zealand available here
16) It has become common to divide biofuels into ‘generations’, depending on the crop or the conversion technology involved. First generation biofuels: proven and on the market in commercial quantities now, typically sugar cane ethanol, starch-based or corn ethanol, biodiesel from pure plant oil or tallow, and are mostly from food related feed stocks or food wastes. Second generation biofuels: commercially unproven in development and typically derived from non-food related agricultural and forest biomass, algae and wastes, with many being derived from lignocellulosic materials from plants.
It is not until we get to page 49 that we get a summary on the concept of Peak Oil where 5 key questions are listed although an earlier statement “Focusing on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector will also help to reduce New Zealand’s dependency on oil.” gives some indication of the linkage and importance.
How much oil is out there?
How much will the demand for oil grow?
Are the published statistics accurate?
What level of oil recovery is economically feasible?
How feasible is unconventional oil?
After looking at this area earlier this year, my view is that the impact of peak oil is much more prosaic and dramatic than any of these questions suggest. The key question for most users including businesses will be
How much does oil cost now? and how are we going to cope with the various scenarios that see the barrel price go up from already historically high levels. It wouldn’t take much for petrol prices to double and that would remove income from lots of families who don’t always have the flexibility to change jobs or home locations.
“A report tabled in State Parliament today highlights the need for Queensland industry, primary producers and communities to lessen their dependence on imported oil supplies.
The report – Queensland’s Vulnerability to Rising Oil Prices – was tabled by the Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation, Andrew McNamara, who authored the report as a backbencher before his appointment as a Minister last month.
Mr McNamara said the report canvassed a range of options for reducing Queensland’s reliance on oil imports, from reducing our demand to developing alternate energy sources.
“I’m now in the unique position, as the Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation, of having to co-ordinate a whole-of-Government response to my own report,” Mr McNamara said.”
What will be even more interesting in NZ is what will happen to the sustainability arguments if/when there is a change of government at the next election. I’m aware that many interests contributed to this statement of intent document however my concern is that not many (if any)besides lobby groups and the usual suspects will even read it.
There are even a few good charts to help out see page 54 for example on “Increasing the Fuel efficiency of the vehicle fleet”
Given the length of time drivers keep their vehicles, there are significant climate change benefits to targeting vehicles entering the fleet for the first time.
As a result, the government is making it a priority to develop policies to improve the fuel economy of the New Zealand light vehicle fleet. It will do this by working with industry representatives to encourage drivers to buy fuel-efficient vehicles, ensure in-service vehicles meet environmental standards and promote the scrapping
of inefficient vehicles.
Over at the NZ Business Council for Sustainable Development there is some kind of parallel universe going on with their Energy 2050 project which needs to be updated now that this Government Energy Strategy document has been released.
What do you think about the Energy Strategy and Impacts on Transport or any other areas for that matter. You’ve had the weekend to read the document now.
In the words of the King Julian: [shouts] “How long is this going to take?”(To read that is?)
On pages 7 & 8 - the Minister of Energy - David Parker makes these bold statements in the foreword.
“The quest for sustainability is a defining issue of the 21st century. It has taken on a new urgency because of the scale of the environmental challenge the world faces. Traditional patterns of development and fast growing populations have put a huge strain on our planet. This government has put sustainability high on its agenda. In doing so, it has issued a call to action to make New Zealand a truly sustainable nation.
Becoming truly sustainable is not only the right thing to aspire to – it’s also the smart thing to do. In a world that cares about sustainability, positioning New Zealand as sustainable is critical to our common future. It is fundamental to New Zealand’s ability to achieve our economic transformation objectives to ensure our future prosperity and international competitiveness. Making New Zealand sustainable can also stimulate new kinds of business opportunities to transform our abundant natural resources into higher value products, while protecting the environment.”
and a few paragraphs later…..
“The government has set a target for 90 per cent of electricity to be generated from renewable sources by 2025. Increasing the proportion of renewable electricity is an affordable option for New Zealand, using current technology and our indigenous resources, and it is the best choice for a sustainable economy and environment.
Initiatives to increase the proportion of renewable energy used in transport, in the form of biofuels and electricity, will also help reduce New Zealand’s reliance on imported fossil fuels. This will increase the resilience of our transport system and economy to sudden disruptions in oil supply, as well as longer-term concerns about global oil supplies and price uncertainty.
The New Zealand Energy Strategy, and the New Zealand Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy in particular, will also help us to become more energy efficient in our homes, working places and in transport.
Improving the way we use energy makes good sense in terms of improved comfort, lower costs and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
Moving to a secure and low emissions energy system will also require changes in the way energy services such as electricity, heat and motive power are produced and delivered. Many of the actions in the New Zealand Energy Strategy will ensure that New Zealand is well positioned to take up opportunities provided by emerging low carbon technologies when they are available, cost effective and applicable to New Zealand.
We are determined to become a truly sustainable nation, and even a carbon neutral nation. This strategy maps out an ambitious but achievable pathway for the reduction of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions.”
One early decision based on this strategy is that (Government owned SOE) Genesis Energy’s $500 million gas-fired power station planned for Rodney will no longer go ahead. Shareprices in Trustpower and Contact Energy have gone up.
From page 18 Strategic Leadership
“In support of this principle, and providing time for the full introduction of a price on greenhouse gas emissions, the government’s view is that there should not be a need for any new baseload fossil fuel generation investment for the next ten years. The government expects all generators, including state-owned enterprises, to take its views into account when considering new generation investments, and the government will advise state-owned enterprises that it expects them to follow this guidance.
For transport, the government has taken an in-principle decision to set a target of halving domestic transport emissions per capita by 2040 relative to 2007 emissions. The key areas for action are reducing greenhouse gas emissions by using alternative renewable fuels, significantly increasing vehicle efficiency, using more efficient modes of transport, and travel demand management through smarter planning.
The government is committed to building momentum in the uptake of electric vehicles and has taken an in-principle decision that New Zealand will be one of the first countries in the world to widely deploy electric cars. This will also make New Zealand more resilient to international oil price uncertainty and risks of supply disruptions. The introduction of biofuels will also increase the diversity of transport fuels.”
Might also be a good time to check this Radio NZ interview with David King -Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK Government, talks about climate change with Kim Hill Current (current Podcasts here -duration: 32?44?) File Size:15.3MB, Date: (Sat, 06 Oct 2007 08:30:00 +1300)
I need to finish the report fully before making any comments. In the meantime I’m hoping for some better coverage over here at RSS Energy Feed or here for web, both from the NZ Herald.
“Using film that has been captured over the past eight years and in full production over the past two years, the film is certainly going to lead the way for next years documentary lineup and standards.
Shot entirely in Burma and alongside of the Shan State Army (SSA), one of the last remaining ethnic groups still battling the government regime, this film will take the viewer inside a world never seen before.
From the original obstacles of getting in, hiding from government patrols, to the SSAs daily life of hiding and running, dry season battles and the civilian village life that follows every step”
“The current military junta, with the Orwellian name of SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Committee), has been in control since 1988 when it cancelled the results of a democratic election and proceeded to kill and jail thousands.
The symbol of the struggle, Aung San Suu Kyi (pronounced Ong Sawn Sue Chee), has not been killed because she is the daughter of Burma’s equivalent of George Washington, the national hero Aung San who led the revolution for Burma’s independence after WWII. Educated in Britain and once having worked with the U.N., Suu Kyi’s character has been shaped by her father’s fierce belief in a free, democratic Burma, and by the nonviolence of Gandhi. (She got to know Gandhi’s story intimately when her mother was Burmese ambassador to India.)
The current crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrations demands solidarity. It will be difficult for governments to put pressure on the military unless China can be persuaded to threaten to cut off their lucrative natural gas contracts with Burma.”
I wondered if the oil and gas resources offer much leverage. According to the Energyfiles while there are good supplies of gas the overall forecast for oil is not that high. However other reports suggest differently.
“Myanmar (formerly Burma) was one of the first countries ever to produce oil (if not the first) from hand-dug wells hundreds of years ago. Production over a few barrels per day began in 1889 and has been erratic through the years declining to almost nothing for a period after World War 2.”
“Mukherjee, during recent visits to Thailand and South Korea, expanded a bit on New Delhi’s thinking. He said that India does not have any problems dealing with military regimes as it considers such issues “internal matters”.
New Delhi has to deal with four military-ruled states in its region - Bangladesh, Pakistan, Thailand and Myanmar. This is apart from communist-ruled China, Mukherjee said.”
Later on in the same article though - Oil & Gas does come up - $600m p.a is still a large enough number to be concerned about.
Energy-hungry India and China are in competition over the massive Shwe natural gas development project, in which ONGC and India’s utility Gas Authority of India Limited (GAIL) are partners under the majority stakeholder, South Korea’s Daewoo.
Irked by delays in implementing the Myanmar-Bangladesh-India pipeline, and with strategic support from China at international forums, Myanmar has inked a memorandum of understanding with PetroChina to supply 6.5 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of gas from Block A of the Shwe gas fields in the Bay of Bengal for over 30 years. PetroChina is the listed subsidiary of China National Petroleum Corporation.
The advent of China as an end-user creates an awkward situation as India will effectively be supplying gas to China, its biggest competitor for oil and gas.
Shwe is expected to generate up to $600 million in revenue every year for Myanmar over the next two decades.’
Unlike India, we do not share a border with Burma however, as a member country of the ARF forum of ASEAN there may be ways that we can use that connection to give hope to the people of Burma. It seems like the current crisis is exactly what the ARF forum was designed to do according to this note I found there.
“In recognition of security interdependence in the Asia-Pacific region, ASEAN established the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in 1994. The ARF’s agenda aims to evolve in three broad stages, namely the promotion of confidence building, development of preventive diplomacy and elaboration of approaches to conflicts.
The present participants in the ARF include: Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Canada, China, European Union, India, Indonesia, Japan, Democratic Republic of Korea, Republic of Korea (ROK), Lao PDR, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Singapore, Thailand, the United States, and Viet Nam.”
Must be time to check out what else can be done. Free Burma.
Recent Comments