Reblogged

RE-BLOG Adam Voulstaker: Desolation of Smog

Posted onAuthorSea RotmannLeave a comment

To the sound of bugles bicycle bells, the Council Annual plan 2016-2017 arrived yesterday. Link: Council 2016 – 2017 Annual Plan Wrapped up with the 2015-2016 proposal is the “Draft Low Carbon Capital Plan,” where we minions get until 29th April to hand in our feedback. “2016 Low Carbon Capital Plan – adoption of a plan to reduce emissions in a constructive and business-friendly way. The plan details how the Council plans to reduce carbon emissions in the city and from Council operations.” Link: 2016 Draft Low Carbon Capital Plan Open up the Low Carbon plan and you get an angel riding a bicycle. I think it’s an angel, I can’t be sure from that angle. They do appear to have a bell though so that’s nice. The 2016 Low carbon plan is 46 pages of stuff that has already been said 3 years ago in the 2013 climate change plan. Anyway….open up page 10 of the 2016 Low Carbon Plan and it says…. Page 10: “On the other hand, we have a major international airport within the city limits, so we are credited with the emissions of nearly all of the region’s domestic air travel. This creates multiple complex challenges – with less Read More …

RE-BLOG STRATHMORE PARK: Wellington Airport Extension – More shocking facts emerge

Posted onAuthorSea Rotmann1 Comment

Posted some weeks back this is the submission by the Guardian’s of the Bay on the so-called Airport Extension, or otherwise known out this way as the White Elephant Project. What is interesting are the take outs from the submission. We’ve summarised them so you don’t have to read the entire thing though we suggest you do. We’d suggest the authors have more skill and experience than the authors of the “reports” so far that have been anything but convincing in their argument to put our rates up and provide corporate welfare for a company that is not only helping contribute to emissions (Z Energy) but also has several hundred million sitting about. Now, some of these are my notes mixed in with GotB’s notes. So that you know. The original submission is here. Things you didn’t know about the Wellington Airport Extension There is still no way central government is going to pay because the Council hasn’t followed the Treasury Guidelines to apply for funding. Despite calls for Consultation, the WCC not only has failed to do so, but it also appears that they have already made up their mind. Even Green councilors, Free, and Lee, have not made Read More …

RE-BLOG Transport Blog: WCC proposes to reduce emissions by increasing congestion and encouraging more long haul flights

Posted onAuthorSea RotmannLeave a comment

It’s amazing what the Wellington City Council gets up to. Living Wage. Supporting the airport runway extension by using overly optimistic figures. Jinxing NZTA’s plan to reduce congestion in the inner city and the Eastern Suburbs. Island Bay Cycleway. Zealandia bailout. Convention centres. Selling Jack Illot Green and the Michael Fowler carpark to build high rise buildings. The list goes on and on… I suppose the #WellingtonWay of reducing carbon emissions is to increase carbon emissions and destroy a marine reserve! Anyway, I will focus on the rank hypocrisy of the Wellington City Council in regards to its proposed Climate Action Plan. The plan is to wage a war against the car while preaching for an airport runway extension, more long haul flights and helping their developer mates. It is unbelievable that the Green Party is staying quiet about it [Ed: they are not. David Lee and Sarah Free have both come out in public against the extension]. Maybe only the Greens are allowed to massively increase emissions and destroy a marine reserve while saying they’ll do the opposite! Anyone else who does the same thing would get roasted by them and their supporters. One of them (proposals) is a Read More …

RE-BLOG Transporting Wellington: Airport runway extension does not stack up. Lester spits the dummy

Posted onAuthorSea RotmannLeave a comment

It is true that the Airport runway extension does not make sense. Therefore it is important that the information gets out to the wider community, rather than just to a bunch of local bloggers. This from  Strathmore Park. For years now, Wellington International Airport and it’s pet monkey the WCC have been pushing for an airport extension. And for years now, it hasn’t stacked up. No small wonder when the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) and the Board of Airlines Representatives of New Zealand (BARNZ) slammed the business case that the Pollyanna Team had put together in support of the extension. The WCC has poured millions after millions into this project paying for reports that have been slammed every time they are produced. This airport extension does not stack up, for anyone, other than Infratil. Key Finding: the central scenario BCR of 1.7 is significantly over-stated The reason that it stacks up for Infratil is that they, being in a monopoly position, can take profit based on square meterage. This is governed by the Commerce Commission. The more land they have the more profit they can take. It is no small wonder then that attempting to secure thousands of Read More …

RE-BLOG Strathmore Park: Wellington Airport extension supporters suffering Polyannaism

Posted onAuthorSea RotmannLeave a comment

For years now, Wellington International Airport and it’s pet monkey the Wellington City Council have been pushing for an airport extension. And for years now, it hasn’t stacked up. No small wonder when the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) and the Board of Airlines Representatives of New Zealand (BARNZ) slammed the business case that the Pollyanna Team had put together in support of the extension. The WCC has poured millions after millions into this project paying for reports that have been slammed every time they are produced. This airport extension does not stack up, for anyone, other than Infratil. Key Finding: the central scenario BCR of 1.7 is significantly over-stated. The reason that it stacks up for Infratil is that they, being in a monopoly position, can take profit based on square meterage. This is governed by the Commerce Commission. The more land they have the more profit they can take. It is no small wonder then that attempting to secure thousands of extra square meters, with the public paying far more than their fair share, is attractive. There are numerous gaps in the draft analysis. But the Council continues to support the extension despite the evidence showing Read More …

REBLOG Strathmore Park Blog: Singapore Airlines just saved Wellington $90m

Posted onAuthorSea RotmannLeave a comment

News this week that Singapore Airlines will be flying “direct” from Wellington to Singapore via Canberra single-handedly proving that we don’t need a $300m plus runway extension to access Asia and saving the ratepayers the $90m that was looking earmarked for the project. Rejoice Wellington. In a Powerpoint Presentation written by what appears to be a PR Company engaged by the Wellington City Council, (WCC Presentation), the platitudes run thick and fast. Sadly, as usual, the propaganda is flowing in some places. “It proves that direct flights to Asia will be feasible.” Well, no, it proves that flights to Singapore via Canberra will be feasible right up until the point other competition enters the same market. Because right now Singapore Air gets the march on consumers wanting to fly to Asia, but once another airline starts the same route, the economics are likely to be stuffed proper. And Singapore Airlines are getting subsidised by the ratepayers it seems. In terms of direct flights to Asia, it really doesn’t prove anything. In fact, so far, the WCC and WIAL have single-handedly failed to explain how it will be economically viable. We already know that twenty airlines have said they wouldn’t use Read More …

REBLOG Keith Johnson: The business case for (or should that be against?) the Wellington runway extension

Posted onAuthorSea Rotmann1 Comment

DOWN TO EARTH WITH A BUMP Everyone is slowly getting back to normality after the Christmas Holidays here in the Antipodes. The holidays are taken very seriously [or should I say ‘unseriously’], resulting both in substantial brain-fade during their duration and the build up of a toxic aversion to a return work among most citizens. Like many, I took work with me during my vacation and did virtually nothing. I had loaded the SELENA Spreadsheet Model on my hard drive. This had been supplied under an Official Information Request to the consulting group Sapere, via Wellington City Council. These Rascals used the Model to generate the numbers for the Report which they prepared for Wellington International Airport Limited [WIAL]: ‘Cost Benefit Analysis of the Proposed Runway Extension at Wellington International Airport’ [by Kieran Murray, John Wallace, Preston Davies – you naughty boys]. Fortunately, when I tried to test the scenarios and unlock the coding behind the Model, I was met with the instruction: ‘The cell or chart you are trying to change is protected and read only. To modify … you may be prompted for a password’. This allowed me to get back on the plonk and chill. However, I Read More …

REBLOG Croaking Cassandra: Further thoughts on the Wellington Airport Part 2

Posted onAuthorSea Rotmann1 Comment

In my first post today, I posed some questions around the plausibility of the assumed increase in international travel into and out of New Zealand if the proposed Wellington airport runway extension was to proceed. In this post, I want to focus mainly on how the consultants have calculated the net national benefits from the runway extension. The Sapere cost-benefit analysis estimates net benefits to New Zealand from proceeding with the runway extension now of $2090 million (2015/16 dollars).  These results are summarised in Table 30 of the report.  Of these gains, just under half accrue to New Zealand users of the airport (in respect of both passenger and freight traffic) and just over half accrue to “other sections of the community”. Even if the passenger number assumptions are correct, the benefits to New Zealand users appear to be somewhat overstated, and the benefits to the rest of the community are largely non-existent. Take  the users first.    The main benefit to New Zealand users is the lower cost of travel.   Much of that is the cost of time.  The consultants have valued the time of New Zealand travellers using some standard values from an Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority document, but Read More …

REBLOG Croaking Cassandra: Further thoughts on the airport Part 1

Posted onAuthorSea Rotmann1 Comment

Shortly after the release of the cost-benefit analysis of the proposed Wellington airport runway extension, prepared by Sapere for Wellington International Airport Limited (WIAL) I wrote a post in which I posed the question “If they build it, what if no one comes?” Since that post, I’ve been to one of the open day/public consultation meetings, have read and thought about the documents more thoroughly, and have read various pieces written by others, including the new one by Ian Harrison that I linked to yesterday.  I have also had some engagement with Sapere and WIAL, which has helped to sharpen my sense of what the issues really are. The cost-benefit analysis is not a business case document.  It has been prepared in support of a resource consent application.  What I hadn’t known when I wrote earlier (and was advised of by Sapere) is that  under the RMA the applicants will need to be able to demonstrate national benefits to get permission to fill in some more of Lyall Bay, to extend the runway. I’m sure that the cost-benefit analysis is not serving as a business case for Infratil, the major shareholder in WIAL.  But since this project is generally accepted Read More …

REBLOG Strathmore Park: Knowing better than the locals

Posted onAuthorSea RotmannLeave a comment

by Lindsay Shelton The Wellington Airport campaign to promote a longer runway is similar to the Transport Agency’s campaign about building a flyover at the Basin Reserve. Both commissioned large numbers of experts to support what they wanted to do. Both failed to connect with the communities who would be most affected. The Transport Agency commissioned 21 reports in support of its flyover idea –ten of them from Opus Consulting. This led to a discussion about conflict of interest, which was followed by the resignation of one of the four government-appointed members of the board of inquiry. (At the same time as Opus was supporting the flyover plan, it was also writing a report for the Regional Council, warning that the consequences of building new motorways would increase congestion in Wellington. A reminder that experts can be commissioned to write reports that reflect different, even conflicting, points of view.) The Transport Agency’s 21 reports failed to convince the board of inquiry, or the High Court, both of whom rejected the flyover. And now the airport has released 27 reports, all singing the praises of a longer runway. The one that we’ve focussed on is the noise report – which tells Read More …