Auckland Transport Update

·

Latest from AT while Auckland rides through the weather

 

As of 12:15pm from AT

TRANSPORT UPDATE

All of Tamaki Drive has reopened except for Kohimarama between Averill Ave and Selwyn Ave where a local detour is in place. This section is expected to reopen around 2pm.

 

 

As of 11:20am from AT

AUCKLAND TRANSPORT UPDATE

Update on Tamaki Drive

Auckland Transport is working to re-open Tamaki Drive after this morning’s flooding.

The part of the road Ngapipi Road to Selwyn Ave will open shortly, followed by section from The Strand to Ngapipi.

All going well the remaining area Selwyn Ave to Averill Ave will re-open at around 2pm.

 

 

 

From Auckland Transport as of 10:30am

Bad weather disrupting roads and buses, trains not affected

This morning’s bad weather has closed some roads and is affecting bus services in Auckland.

This is the latest information:

“Tamaki Dr

  • Road closed between The Strand and Kohimarama Rd
  • All bus services detouring via Shore Rd/Kepa Rd
  • Major delays – Shore Rd currently bumper to bumper

” Remuera Rd – Greenlane/Ladies Mile Intersection

  • Traffic lights out at these intersections
  • Major delays in the area
  • Affects all Remuera Rd bus services

” Whangaparoa – By Marellen Dr

  • Partial road closure due to fallen trees

” Pt Chevalier – Selwyn Village

  • Road closure affecting 007 bus services

 

” Quay St – Lower Albert to Lower Queen St

  • Partial road closure but most buses remaining on route
  • City LINK from Wynyard Quarter detouring via Customs St
  • Some traffic getting funnelled into Britomart causing delays

” Meadowbank – Harapaki Rd – ROAD NOW OPEN

General delays apply to the entire bus network due to severe congestion on most arterial roads.

All train services are operating as per normal.

 

 

More updates as they come through

Stay safe out there folks and keep listening to updates from Civil Defence please. 

Has the Public Lost Interest in the Council?

· 1 Comment ·

Numbers suggest not

 

I noted yesterday that Councillor Cameron Brewer (surprise – surprise) released an “opinion” on the public losing interest with Auckland Council. The actual question is ‘has the public actually lost interest?’ I would say no and even Radio new Zealand’s Todd Niall would say no in his written correspondence earlier this week.

 

Lets take a look at what Councillor Brewer is saying this time.

From Voxy:

Opinion: Public lose interest in Auckland Council

Wednesday, 16 April, 2014 – 14:40

By Cameron Brewer, Auckland Councillor

The second term Auckland Council is proving to be an interesting one and very different to the inaugural 2010 – 2013 Governing Body.

We are currently going through a budget round to lock in where council’s $3b expenditure is directed for the forthcoming 2014/15 financial year.

This year we had fewer than 2,000 written submissions from the public on our Draft Annual Plan with only a few dozen turning up to speak to their submissions. The Mayor takes this as a vote of confidence in the council, but I take a different view.

My view is that the public interest in this council is at an all-time low because Aucklanders are increasingly of the view that this term is a bit of a lost cause, a bit of a political basket case. The Mayor has hung on to his political career but has lost a lot of political capital. Whatever your view on that, this is bad for Auckland.

….

Todd Niall and myself have already commented on the low Annual Plan submission count and why it was that low. You can see my own commentary behind to low submission count (which includes extract’s from Todd’s analysis) here: “Todd Niall Hits the Budget Nail on its Head.”

From that commentary piece:

To be honest I can see why both the Annual Plan submission count is very low and how most submissions were pertaining to local rather than regional issues. For the low submission count the Annual Plan submissions were called for during the final weeks of the massive Unitary Plan submission period. With limited time and resources available a conscious call might have been made on which of the two submissions you would pick to get done. Is it the Annual Plan or is it the Unitary Plan? I made such a conscious decision and chose the Unitary Plan over the Annual Plan to dedicate my submission time to – so as a result no submission from me on the Annual Plan this round.

What also factored into not doing an Annual Plan submission this round was the knowledge knowing the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan (the main Council budget document) is coming up for debate soon. Something again Todd Niall points out…

…

Maybe that’s why Aucklanders have turned out in such low numbers to have their say on this year’s annual plan. They know that far bigger debates lie ahead.

…

Source: https://voakl.net/2014/04/15/todd-niall-hits-the-budget-nail-on-its-head/

Again I would say that is why the submission count is low not because we have lost interest but rather we had the Unitary Plan at the same time as well as knowing those bigger more important debates ahead (like the Long Term Plan).

The Unitary Plan submission count (at 8,900 as of the beginning of the month) I would say is a testimony to Auckland paying interest into what Council is doing. Of course we have the next Unitary Plan submission round late next month where anyone can submit on the points previously made (so no new material). Also if you are like me you are taking a break between all these big submission and consultation periods unless you want to burn yourself out from it all.

 

Continuing from Voxy

The lack of interest and coverage shows that the public and media have effectively given up on this term, with 2016 set to be a watershed election.

One thing’s for sure the third term will be just as different again with a new Mayor and many new councillors after a whole new public mandate and direction sought and secured.

….

Be very careful what you wish for Councillor. I can assure you the public and media (both Main Stream, and Social) have certainly not given up on this term. That said I do believe and agree that the third term will be quite different with new Councillors including a possible replacement for Orakei Ward too 😉 .

 

Finally:

In the meantime all councillors are committed to making a difference. For me it means keeping the Mayor accountable and focusing on the likes of fighting for lower rates increases and pushing for more sustainable debt levels. I will also continue to advocate for regional funding for projects in the Orakei ward area.

….

Groan…

Local Boards I thought would be the best advocates for getting funding for projects in their local area while ward Councillors are meant to be focusing on the big picture regional stuff. Or did Cameron not read this: Slow News Day. We Have the Bigger Picture to Focus On

 

Oh well I suppose the above was expected from Councillor Brewer.

In the mean time this storm outside is causing enough havoc as is – although I still have mains power in Papakura for now

 

Stay safe out there folks and keep listening to updates from Civil Defence please. 

 

Continued Efficiency Savings at the Council

·

More Efficiency Savings

 

From Auckland Council:

Amalgamation benefits boost council savings

 

Improved economies of scale from the amalgamation of the eight local authorities have helped Auckland Council maintain services at reduced cost, says a council report on efficiency savings.

Average rates increases have reduced year on year from previously anticipated rises while capital works are nearly double that of the former councils.

Annual operating savings to June 2013 were $131million and are budgeted to be $188million by June 2018.

Savings have come from benefits including:

  • simpler and better information technology
  • better purchasing and tendering processes
  • bringing more work in-house to reduce reliance on external resources
  • reducing the number of office buildings occupied.

 

“The benefits of amalgamation become more evident with each year,” said Councillor Penny Webster, chair of the Finance and Performance Committee.

“We’re running a ruler over everything we do as we manage ratepayers money.  That’s what is expected of us and we are delivering savings while pressing ahead with projects that will make the city a .better place for residents to live in, enjoy, and prosper,” she said.

—-Ends—

 

You can read both the Finance and Performance Committee Agenda, and Addendum Agenda (which contains the motions on disposing of the Civic Building mentioned here: Future Uncertain for Civic Building)

 

 

Future Uncertain for Civic Building

·

Shall it stay or shall it go?

 

Questions are being asked on what to do with the Auckland Council Civic Building that currently houses the Councillors, the Deputy Mayor, and support infrastructure (including staff) before they all move to the new complex at the old ASB Tower at 135 Albert Street.

From Auckland Council:

Future of first skyscraper up in the air

 

The future of New Zealand’s first skyscraper, the 100m tall Auckland Council Civic Administration Building, is in the balance. To be vacated by the council later this year for new headquarters at 135 Albert Street, the building has serious structural issues and would require an estimated $70million retrofit to give it a new lease of life. The council has no further identifiable use for the building – designed in the 1950s and opened in 1966 – so it faces possible demolition or refurbishment for other uses, the Finance and Performance Committee heard today.

At the leading edge of building technology when constructed, the building is not listed for protection but two recent assessments suggest it worthy of Category A or B scheduling. Category A listing would limit the type of renovation permitted. 

Refurbishment would have to include removing asbestos installed during construction as a fire retardant.

The committee decided to test the market for investor interest in refurbishment and at the same time request Regional Facilities Auckland, a council controlled organisation, to include the building in a review of possible future uses of the Civic /Aotea Centre precinct.

“Market testing and precinct planning opportunities will allow us to determine the future of the building with a complete picture of options and costs,” said committee chair Councillor Penny Webster. 

Staff will report back before the end of the year.

—-ends—-

 

Personally I say demolish it and either put a plaza there our some other new building to support the Aotea Centre.

 

China and India Developing Thorium Power Generation

·

The Nuke  – Part of the Future Tool Kit

 

Last year I wrote a post on what is known as Generation IV nuclear power generation and the potential benefits it could deliver to an ever energy-hungry world. You can see the post here: Generation IV Nuclear Power

Earlier this month The Economist released its own article on Thorium based nuclear power with it reporting on India and China making the biggest strides as they both try to meet their ever-growing energy demands (without having to revert to coal or gas-fired generation).

From The Economist:

Thorium reactors

Asgard’s fire

Thorium, an element named after the Norse god of thunder, may soon contribute to the world’s electricity supply

Apr 12th 2014 | From the print edition

WELL begun; half done. That proverb—or, rather, its obverse—encapsulates the problems which have dogged civil nuclear power since its inception. Atomic energy is seen by many, and with reason, as the misbegotten stepchild of the world’s atom-bomb programmes: ill begun and badly done. But a clean slate is a wonderful thing. And that might soon be provided by two of the world’s rising industrial powers, India and China, whose demand for energy is leading them to look at the idea of building reactors that run on thorium.

Existing reactors use uranium or plutonium—the stuff of bombs. Uranium reactors need the same fuel-enrichment technology that bomb-makers employ, and can thus give cover for clandestine weapons programmes. Plutonium is made from unenriched uranium in reactors whose purpose can easily be switched to bomb-making. Thorium, though, is hard to turn into a bomb; not impossible, but sufficiently uninviting a prospect that America axed thorium research in the 1970s. It is also three or four times as abundant as uranium. In a world where nuclear energy was a primary goal of research, rather than a military spin-off, it would certainly look worthy of investigation. And it is, indeed, being investigated.

India has abundant thorium reserves, and the country’s nuclear-power programme, which is intended, eventually, to supply a quarter of the country’s electricity (up from 3% at the moment), plans to use these for fuel. This will take time. The Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research already runs a small research reactor in Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu, and the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre in Mumbai plans to follow this up with a thorium-powered heavy-water reactor that will, it hopes, be ready early next decade.

China’s thorium programme looks bigger. The Chinese Academy of Sciences claims the country now has “the world’s largest national effort on thorium”, employing a team of 430 scientists and engineers, a number planned to rise to 750 by 2015. This team, moreover, is headed by Jiang Mianheng, an engineering graduate of Drexel University in the United States who is the son of China’s former leader, Jiang Zemin (himself an engineer). Some may question whether Mr Jiang got his job strictly on merit. His appointment, though, does suggest the project has political clout. The team plan to fire up a prototype thorium reactor in 2015. Like India’s, this will use solid fuel. But by 2017 the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics expects to have one that uses a trickier but better fuel, molten thorium fluoride.

…..

Molten Thorium Fluoride otherwise known as the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor – a form of the Molten Salt Reactor design. More on the LFTR type of reactor can be found HERE with a basic design of such a reactor below:

Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Molten_Salt_Reactor.svg/1000px-Molten_Salt_Reactor.svg.png

 

The rest of The Economist article carries on listing the benefits and challenges of Thorium based power. I noted in the Wikipedia article that Thorium based nuclear energy could even be used for what is known as nuclear desalination (using nuclear energy to turn sea-water into fresh water). Nuclear desalination already happens on a limited scale and you can read about it HERE. In a sense of irony the late Gerry Anderson’s ‘Thunderbirds’ had an episode (one of my favourites) called the Mighty Atom where in 2065 the Australians and later north Africans used nuclear energy to turn sea water into fresh water for use of irrigation in the Earth’s deserts (most likely to address the growing food shortage in that era). However, the arch-villain The Hood had accidentally set off a chain of events that destroyed the Australian atomic irrigation station (nearly poisoning Melbourne on the way), while a year later committed a deliberate act of sabotage to the Saharan atomic irrigation station to attract out International Rescue who would go on saving the station.

 

Cult classics aside, nuclear energy was once touted as a large-scale replacement to fossil fuel power generation for large industrialised or industrialising accidents. However, convention nuclear power (that uses uranium and plutonium) has suffered a series of critical set backs (three major meltdowns) that will never allow it to be as widespread as once promised in the 1960’s. But we can also not continue to increase our waste gas emissions from increasing fossil fuel use as the world economy (well) splutters forward. Solar and wind are good for micro and localised uses while hydro meets resistance owing to dams changing the ecology of the river being dam-ed (or damned). Thorium-based power could give an answer to our large industrial and industrialising countries that is clean and goes some distance in weaning that country off fossil fuel based power generation. India and China see the potential so it is hoped that other nations including the Americans (who bottled the technology effectively in the 60’s when they realised Thorium reactors could not produce nuclear weapon fuel for their Cold War “efforts”). And as fresh water becomes more scarce, nuclear desalination could provide assistance in turning sea-water into potable water for both drinking and irrigation.

 

And for those Thunderbird fans out there here is Part One of The Mighty Atom (and yes it has that line: “The REACTOR is under the complete control of the project staff – nothing CAN GO WRONG……):