General Debate 10/03/11

Looks like NZ’s windfarms are going down the same road as their overseas counterparts. They will never work.

NZ Windfarms has downgraded its full-year guidance and expects to make a loss as construction delays and low wholesale prices sap revenue streams from its Manawatu development. The company forecast a net loss of $2.4 million in the year ended June 30, slashing its guidance of a $107,000 profit from its April 2010 prospectus.

It expects annual earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation of $1 million. That comes as it narrowed its first-half loss to $1.8 million in the six months ended December 31 from a loss of $6.5 million a year earlier, the company said in a statement. New chairman Wyatt Creech said earnings were hindered by the construction delays at Te Rere Hau in Manawatu, low wind volumes, and soft wholesale prices due to high storage levels in hydro-lakes.

Two of these problems are not going to go away.

Windfarms has struggled over the last couple of years with hiccups at its Te Rere Hau project, including complaints over the noise levels of its turbines, and a protracted dispute with Windflow Technology, which manufactures its two-bladed turbines. The company has focused on the eastern extension of Te Rere Hau, which will lift the number of turbines to 97, and is expected to be completed by the end of June.

First-half revenue was flat at $1.6 million, and ebitda was a loss of $497,000 compared to a loss of $1 million in 2009. The shares fell 2.4 per cent to $1.63 in trading yesterday, and have dropped 7.2 per cent this year.

Story from Stuff.

9 thoughts on “General Debate 10/03/11

  1. More flogging of a dead horse …

    If we want a truly “green” energy source we should be researching methods to economically crack water. Forget about solar, wind and tidal power generation.

    Like

  2. I think the solution for our future energy needs is simple – remove all subsidies, licences, resource consents and government onwership, and private enterprise will take care of the rest as the lesson of history makes abundantly clear…

    Like

  3. and the answer my friend is blowing in the wind…pity if you are downwind,the stench from the decaying corpse that was AGW is overpowering.Time to disempower the idiots(i.e. Nick Smith) who continue to support/spout this utter nonsense… preferably before the lights go out.

    Like

  4. I see that painful liberal Farrar is posting against the death penalty again. I disagree of course, but what really gets up my nose is the excuse he uses that innocent people may be executed. This is a complete red herring, and one that proves that Farrar and other such wet liberals are incapable of thinking rationally on the issue.

    There are plenty of murders where the guilt of the perpetrator is beyond doubt. (Sophie Elliot, Kuchenbecker killed by escapee Graeme Burton) This is the case they need to argue if they really want a debate, and are not just trying to lay down the usual smoke.

    Like

  5. You can of course limit the death penalty to cases of calculated murder and murder in the commission of violent with overwhelming DNA and/or fingerprint evidence and/or numerous eyewitnesses…

    Like

  6. Red,

    This is a complete red herring, and one that proves that Farrar and other such wet liberals are incapable of thinking rationally on the issue.

    And not ONLY on this issue.
    I think most social liberals can’t think rationally on pretty much the entire raft of social issues. For example, homosexual ‘marriage’, adoption, etc; abortion; youth drinking culture; feminism; multiculturalism; Christianity … [tell me when to stop].

    Liberalism/Progressivism really is a mental illness.

    Like

  7. As regards subsidies, I just watched an episode of Yes Minister and this bit reminded me of you, Red (the context is that a council is proposing to sell an art gallery to a supermarket chain, and use the money to provide a desperately-needed loan to the local football club):

    Subsidy is for Art. It is for Culture. It is not to be given to what the people want, it is for what the people don’t want, but ought to have. If they really want something, they will pay for it themselves. The Government’s duty is to subsidise education, enlightenment, and spiritual uplift, not the vulgar pastimes of ordinary people.

    Like

Comments are closed.