Comments on: Time to Divest from Bathurst Resources

By: Ian

Ian — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:55:33 +0000

Tim, it seems we both hope for a brighter future where technology spares us from the tough questions faced, But there is a casm between us and the future, a casm of time. I sincerely believe that we should forge ahead to a future envisaged by JF in her article but I am not convinced by a speculative and un quantified article such as this.

The economics of the steel making processes you put forward are at this stage not feasible on the scale the world requires. of course we could limit our demand, but the demand for steel is largely in the growing economies. Do you propose that we limit our supply so as to limit their demand. Look back into last century and see what that sought of limiting did to the world on a geo political level.

As world population surges towards 9 billion I understand all of your concerns, but the conjecture and guestimation you put forward as arguments are not answers in the here and now. They are encouragement to move forward to a better future, but what we need is proper management of our coal resources to most efficiently get to the future we both yearn for

The real answers we need are at an individual level, each of us dotted across the globe needs to assume responsibility for our own footprint we leave on this earth. but as we ride our bikes across pristine coastal tracks don’t bellieve for a minute that your reality is the same reality faced by a farmer in regional China or a Family struggling to eat in Greece or mid west USA.

It is a complicated world and your answers are not your neighbours

By: Tim Jones (@timjonesbooks)

Tim Jones (@timjonesbooks) — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:03:43 +0000

Ian, I’m not quite sure whether I follow your argument, but if you think Guy Salmon is correct that we need steel to make coal, I suggest that you read this and think again: http://coalactionnetworkaotearoa.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/can-we-make-steel-without-coal/

By: Ian

Ian — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:33:38 +0000

“In its March 2012 newsletter, Bathurst Resources featured Salmon’s role in assisting the company with its controversial Buller Coal Project. “Let’s look at the two key environmental concerns about coal mining. The first is climate change. This development on the Buller Plateau is not about thermal coal that’s going to burn in power stations. There are many ways of generating electricity and, in my view, coal isn’t the best way. This coal is steelmaking coal and, at the moment, there is no substitute for coal’s role in steel making. So as long as the world needs pots and pans, at least for the foreseeable future, we need this type of coal,” Salmon stated” From elsewhere on this website

So with energy there is an alternative (as long as you are prepared to bare the burden of additional cost, but with Steel making it is coking coal or nothing. How do you respond to this Debs.

I seem to be missing half the argument, please enlighten me

ian
.

By: Debs

Debs — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:30:02 +0000

In reply to Brian. thanks for that comment Brian. i'm keen to try and follow that one up.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 06:14:57 +0000

PM John Key has shares in Merrill Lynch. That’d be a good start, forcing him to DIVEST. But he also has shares in the Bank of America who pretty much OWN Merrill Lynch (and probably JP Morgan as well). Do I detect some conflicts of interest for the PM? What media outlet can take him on? Is there one that ISN’T owned by the corporate finance giants?