Give us a say on energy options

Our present government has shown considerable enthusiasm for finding and exploiting possible undersea oil, gas and mineral reserves. We are told this could bring significant economic benefit, but there are good reasons to hesitate before going down this road.

One is highlighted by a paper titled Unburnable Carbon 2013: Wasted Capital and Stranded Assets by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change (part of the London School of Economics) and a non-profit research group called Carbon Tracker. This report concludes that in order to have a 50 per cent chance of limiting global warming to two degrees, we can emit about 1000 gigatons of CO2 between now and 2050. This is identified as our "carbon budget". It represents about a third of the Earth's estimated oil, gas and coal reserves, which means that two-thirds of those reserves will have to stay underground. The International Energy Agency agrees.

By now, most of the world's thinkers and planners understand that we need to stop emitting CO2. Even the smarter oil industry figures concede that oil is a transitional fuel.

Unfortunately, it seems that very few governments, with the notable exception of the Scandinavian countries and Germany, are willing to get serious about driving the transition. Clean energy technologies to pull this off are up and running, but fossil fuels are still heavily subsidised, both directly, and through not being required to pay for the downstream damage caused by their use.

Meanwhile, oil companies continue to look for oil in increasingly expensive and dangerous places. Extraction industry companies' share values are closely linked to their reserves. So, with governments dragging their heels on instigating carbon taxes, they are being encouraged to keep trying to fatten these reserves.

The times, they are a-changin', though. Last May, China proposed banning imports of low-quality coal with a high sulphur and ash content and lower caloric value. If this were to happen, it would leave a lot of coal looking for new markets ... stranded.

With election year upon us it is interesting to note how little is being said about the government's approach to our environment.

Legislation just passed into law has revised regulation of undersea mining to make New Zealand a more attractive option to foreign extraction industry companies.

Part of the revision has made exploration for oil and gas, the riskiest part of the process, non-notifiable. This means we now have no say whatsoever about whether or not it is a good idea to look for oil in an active earthquake zone, at great depths, in open water, far away from help should anything go wrong.

The 2010 Deepwater Horizon event will cost BP US$90 billion ($106 billion) if all claims and fines are paid. Before the revision, companies drilling in our waters were only required to carry $30 million worth of liability cover. I hope this level has increased significantly.

A mining accident at sea could have widespread effects. Locking the population out of part of the permitting process is undemocratic.

Lorna Sutherland has lived in many different places and observes the changes in the natural environment around her.