Return to Welcome Page Public Broadcasting in New Zealand 
(A contrast between how our public broadcasters portray
 the history of the New Zealand Electricity Industry 
and the more probable reality. 
Posted 15 April 2009.

. Return to Update Page


Return to Electric Thinking home page

Return to Compassionate Curriulum - Our Electrical Beings.

Return to David Caygill Blog -NZ Electricity Commission

 Rate your Local Electrical Grid


Photo essay of the near collapse of Wellington City's electrical grid



Link here
 to a list of 
sustainable uses of key symbols - including

energy energy efficiency
global warming

Peak Oil
exponential growth





This was originally written as a posting on the NZ Sustainable Energy Forum (SEF)

Each weekday afternoon Radio New Zealand National broadcasts a discussion group called The Panel. Typically The Panel consists of the host, two prominent NZers (usually media people) and guest experts  who provide supplementary commentary on the topics of the day.

These extracts of the discussion with experts Geoff Bertram and Max Bradford on the current NZ Electricity Market are from the broadcast April 1 2009. Contrary to what some may suspect, the broadcast is not an April Fools Day gag.

The Panel were Host Jim Mora and guests Associate Professor Duncan Webb and Don Donovan

Note: Unfortunately Radio New Zealand is not true public broadcaster and restricts public use of all the audio files it creates on our behalf. Thus this audio remains on its  website for a week and then it disappears. Citizens are not permitted to broadcast the programme and thus I cannot provide the full broadcast. The transcriptions are true as I could make them with my limited facilities.

Each quote is accompanied by my commentary.

”Geoff Bertram always nice to have your expertise…”


Geoff's Profile

Geoff is a senior lecturer in the school of Economics and Finance at Victoria University.

Energy and environmental economics, deregulation of natural monopoly, employment, economic growth and development. Geoff's current research is on "light handed regulation" in New Zealand will particular reference to the electricity and gas network industries; economics of small island development; and current account sustainability."

I have no formal training in economics/accounting or journalism for that matter. I am a school janitor.

As a student in the late 1960s I often shared the company of students of these disciplines. I recall discussing the latest lectures of their professors and becoming incredulous that many of the students accepted the theories as a sustainable reflection of reality. Even pre the Club of Rome some of us perceived the limits to growth and I could see in this context that the economic theories being espoused were dangerously delusional. Alarm bells rang for me when I noted these folk graduating to take up positions of responsibility in the late 1970s in a wide range of institutions, including our Treasury.

It was only when I lived their policies in the general Economic Reforms of the 1980s and the Electricity Industry Reforms in particular that I realised that “business” academia and its graduates really believed their delusional economics theories and  I experienced the brutality of their theories. 

This experience occurred in Wellington. A significant number of the “consultants” I encountered “advising” on the Reforms were Victoria University graduates and I often noted that the University was a cheerleader of the Reforms. (They have since given honorary degrees to the arch proponents of the Electricity Reforms such as Fran Wilde and David Caygill.  

 So I determined to find out just exactly what Victoria University is teaching our young people. Over the last decade I have attended hundreds of lectures and forums of their education, geophysics, business admin, economics and accounting departments. In general I found they are characterised by a lack of science, egoism and general delusion. 

Within this context I rate Geoff Bertram among the saner and least damaging business/economics lecturers.  

Geoff is aware that I worked for decades in the Bulk-generated electricity industry and on at least three occasions I have offered him my insights. As is the norm at Victoria University he evidenced not the slightest interest in my insights, perhaps because he felt meter readers have little to offer. From my point of view I came to believe his “expertise” is not founded in reality. 

The reality I refer to includes the historical fact that over 60 New Zealand communities, representing every region of the nation, got together and designed and built over a period of nearly a century one of the most sophisticated electrical grids on the planet. The fact that all the communities owned their local grids freehold in democratic way was a testament to the depths of the ingenuity and profound intergenerational care and stewardship of those communities.  

On the occasions when I have begun to tell our bright young “business” graduates of this reality their eyes soon cloud over with incredulity and they dismiss it as geriatric humbug and mistaken nostalgia. Their incapacity to begin to imagine such a reality is understandable 

For them life begins about 1984 and it is arguable that they have been subject to serious deceits about history. I have written before on SEF how we employees in the industry were repeatedly told during the Electricity Industry reforms we were “history”. This had multiple malicious meanings: our knowledge of the industry’s history was now considered a liability and we were to be sacked i.e. would be made “history”. As I have noted before TransAlta executives even binned my 25 years of employment records, threatened to “legally annihilate” my family and much worse if I did not shut up and keep right out of the industry.  

I experienced this revisionist process indirectly for several years before I was subjected to it myself. On my meter rounds I had continually came across very talented, experienced and honest individuals who were similarly sacked from Telecom, Ministry of Works, DSIR, NZ Rail and other ex-Government structures. Often they told of how they were punished for blowing the whistle on threats to the public good generated by the Economic Reforms. 

NZ Treasury economists dismissed this group, generally over 40 years of age, as the “lost generation” because we were deemed unable to adapt to the new Rogernomic order. (Remember TINA or There IS NO Alternative?) 

A clear pattern of behaviour is evident and Enron/US policy documents of the 19so-90s support the belief that this suppression of history was deliberate policy. At Enron, for instance, 10% of all employees were sacked annually as a matter of policy to constantly ensure strict conformity and eliminate unwelcome knowledge and questioning of the corporate ethos. 

Check out the reality now

For instance attend lectures on business and “policy” at our universities.

For instance ask for the minutes of the Wellington City Council meetings with the above-mentioned consultants surrounding the decision to sell Capital Power. They are classified not for public release.

For instance pretend you are a young student and do a search on Google on “NZ electricity industry history”. These three were the prime ones that came up page one a minute ago:


Note the common thread - life starts in 1987. Also note how the Mercury money-go-round omits to show that a large quantity of funds are siphoned off as dividends to principal shareholders and as interest to merchant banks.

Also check out

I cannot spot any reference to the TransAlta submission to the 2000 Parliamentary Inquiry into the Electricity Industry and yet I am sure I witnessed their team make a submission.


Geoff Bertram.

..the original idea of breaking the industry up and doing a bit of privatisation and  restructuring was to move to a competitive market …”.


The reality is starkly different. A global oligarchy of bankers were desperate to find ways of maintaining credit expansion. For instance they had been impacted by the 197p mineral oil price spike and had generated irresponsibly large loans in Third World countries who were now defaulting. Also the Savings and Loans collapse was revealing them as bankrupt.  The freehold community-owned grids in countries like New Zealand represented real wealth and the bankers determined to replace community owned structures with privatised (so called “coporatised”) structures restricted by narrowly defined profit imperatives. These structures would enable them to lever off the wealth, maximise their short term profits from burning global fossil fuel reserves, generate large loans and thus stave off the collapse of their credit structures.  

These actions have to be also seen against the wider historical context in which the bankers have attempted to suppress distributed generation and control the flow of information for most of the age of reticulated electricity. They did not want communities to be able to control the potential of and benefit from the confluence of the broadband, Distributed Generation. “smart” metering and appliance and other technologies. In short, they wished to suppress democracy for that holds within it the seeds of real sustainable competition.

Check out the reality: 

Talk to honest councillors, mayors, power board members etc of the 1990s and they will tell you how the consultants pressured them through a compliant media/academia and directly as consultants to “start realising” the value of their electrical grid assets by selling them or, failing that, taking out large loans against them for building roads, sewers etc.

Check out the relative rates of debt in communities before and after the Electricity Reforms and the comparative value of community Trusts.

Check out NZ’s relative fall in rated Internet use.

Check out the relative loss of intelligence and increased incoherence of NZ’s electrical grids now.

Check out how not one NZ community can now own their local electrical grid and its intelligence or effectively compete in the Electricity Market anymore.

Check out how Michael Cullen sold TransPower to Wachovia Bank and immediately converted Meridian’s $800 million “special dividend” from the sale of Oz assets into an extra subsidy for car and truck owners – a double negative whammy as the funds were diverted from much needed Bulk-gen electricity demand reduction to extremely high-risk motorway investment. 


Geoff Bertram Re competition

with Max Bradford coming on you about to hear one minister  who did try to stir the pot…”

Max Bradford

“The small part of the Reforms that I put in place…” 


Max’s 1998 reforms represented one of the single greatest acts of disenfranchisement in New Zealand’s history and destroyed the capacity of all New Zealand communities to make democratic and intelligent use of their local electrical potential. The price of this act is now becoming dreadfully apparent as mineral oil/gas reserves dwindle and communities begin collapsing amidst debt and unemployment. 

The concepts of competition espoused by Geoff and Max are facile.

True competition exists when communities have full access to national markets and a wide range of options. These options include the full democratic rights to use their grids to fund products and programmes that reduce dependence on single products such as Bulk-generated electricity. These may include consumer controlled monitoring  and generating technology such as small scale electrical generators, insulation and storage systems, communication systems and information collation systems.  

Max’s reforms destroyed this competition and gave almost exclusive rights of control of intelligence to the Bulk-gen electricity bankers. As I have noted on SEF before, David Parker’s parliamentary profile stated till very recently how he entered politics because he was so outraged by the 1998 legislation disenfranchising communities. However he and all other  Labour Minsters have worked to embed Max’s reforms into our legislation and into our technological structures. 

(Note as I write it is being announced that Don Brash has been appointed to the TransPower Board and Michael Cullen to the NZ Post Board

Panelists Linda Clark on Afternoons (Nat Radio) observe that these appointments show the “non-tribal” politics of the appointments and David Farrar notes that “Don Brash’s appointment to Transpower is a very smart one because  everyone says that is the SOE you could never possibly sell.” It is a searing indictment of our national state of affaires when a group of our top journalists are unaware that Michael and Don are twins in the same “tribe” and Michael effectively sold TransPower to Wachovia Bank in 2003!) 

I will provide one single practical example to illustrate the nonsense of Max and Geoff’s statement. The Reform legislation resulted in the metering and ripple control technology on consumer boards being transferred to what is euphemistically called the “retailers” or as, Geoff calls the generator-retailers, the “gentailers” (Not to be confused with “gentle folk” or “gentlemen” though they do form an elite gentry or ruling upper class). The official rationale is that this transfer would promote competition and innovation of products.

Here is the reality: 

 Geoff’s “gentailers” commonly make optimal profits when the national grid is stressed and so they have no interest in promoting wise uses of electrical products and effective load control systems. Hence the ripple control system, once a world leading product, languishes and is even considered a liability in charging schedules. 

Geoff’s “Gentailers” are simply not going to invest in metering that empowers consumers and allows them change companies with ease if their investment in the technology is at high risk from customer “churn”. If they rent the meters off so-called “metering companies” then those companies are not going to tailor design for any particular retailer when it could be subject to “churn” either. 

Similarly the ‘gentailers” have no vested interest in using their critical intelligence to maintain accurate and secure metering because they can simply pass on the costs of meter slippage and pilfering. 

The only group who have a true vested interested in intelligent metering are consumers and Max’s legislation has now effectively barred all communities from owning their intelligence.

Ring up your Bulk-gen electricity supplier now and ask if you can use their new “smart” technology to broadcast your dwellings intelligence to any party of your choice and this answer will be no.

Find out where the $700 million or so rental fee went that NZers have paid since the reforms for the use of their previously freehold meters.


Geoff Bertram

“…For the three years when as he (Max Bradford) says electricity prices were held down by competitive pressures the critical thing that was going on in the electricity industry was there was one retailer (TransAlta) there that was fairly  large and was independent of the generators and kept pressure on their margins…


Certainly domestic Bulk-gen electricity prices levelled off in that period but to say the critical factor was TransAlta suggests a lack of knowledge of the general reality. During that period global mineral oil prices were at historical lows (as low as $US9.98 a barrel) and this profoundly affected every aspect of our society. Almost everything became cheap. Also it is easy to minimise price rises short-term if you flare off valuable mineral gas reserves, gut critical systems such as Civil Defence,”energy efficiency” programmes and are prepared to gamble heavily with customer security as the TransAlta structure did and as other Bulk-gen electricity corporations did. 

And TransAlta was a generator in its own right with significant shares in the construction of two gas fired plants that during this period helped accelerate the depletion of the cheaply accessed Maui gas and that were responsible for half the increase in NZ’s carbon dioxide emissions though this period. Globally TransAlta was increasing its investment in generation and by the end of the period owned about 9000 megawatts capacity.  I recall its statements of that time of its plans to extend it capacity in NZ to 2000 megawatts. Its 400 megawatts of gas fired plant gave it a pivotal role in our network and Electricity Industry politics.  

TransAlta failed in its bid for SOE Contact Energy but it is highly probable it anticipated being able to buy another of the SOE Bulk-gen electricity generators on the cheap, especially with Mervyn English as CEO (brother of Hon Bill English and now manager at the Electricity Commission.) The change of Government in 1999 reduced that probability and so TransAlta sold out of NZ at a very significant profit ($NZ350 million according to its Calgery website at the time) and left AGL-NGC holding a mange-ridden dog of an operation that died soon after in 2001 at the same time as Enron.  

Note: TransAlta used the same architects here as Enron – for instance, Arthur Andersen and Co. Both my experience of working with these architects and the US literature suggests that that they saw humans as simply expendable tradeable commodities without civic rights and they specialised in strategies for suppressing innovation and competition. I have detailed some of these on SEF before. See the implications below re human trades. 

The quotes also fail to reflect the political reality of that period. Communities had become alerted to the fact that the arguments of proponents of the Electricity Reforms were profoundly flawed and many of them refused to sell off their local grid and its intelligence. Communities such as Hamilton even bought back their local grids. 

Traditionally some communities such as Christchurch operated very intelligent grids by world standards. Even handicapped by having to operate as ‘profit driven corporation” SouthPower provided a world leading model of good practice. Thus it easily outperformed TransAlta on almost every account and made a lie of the arguments of the bankers and their proxies. Max’s own ideology was revealed as embarrassingly flawed and he was also subject to pressure from the bankers and the likes of TransAlta to stop this “unfair competition” from the likes of Southpower. 

The Christchurch community used the intelligence of its local grid to identify and alleviate poverty, pollution and ensure people could keep warm. The NZ Treasury did not like this (a) on ideological grounds and (b) because it affect tax revenue - the poorer majority do not have the means to bypass GST as do the richer minority. The city was able to use its intelligence, for instance, to reduce the amount of GST transactions paid by its residents on Bulk-gen electricity transactions to under half that paid by people in Wellington under TransAlta.The Business Roundtable condemned the community as “the People’s Republic of Christchurch” which the people turned into a complement. The Roundtable on visits to the city was greeted and mocked with t-shirts acclaiming the city as The Banana Republic of Christchurch. I am told Max got the same reception in the city and it was made clear to him people there were aware of how Southpower outcompeted competitors on a wide range of measures. 

This became very evident to the public after TransAlta used Max’s 1998 reforms to buy the intelligence of SouthPower and Christchurch people became subject to the relatively chronic practices of TransAlta. 

Max was very much a Treasury man. He joined it in 1966 and had been “section head in the energy, economics and industry divisions concentrating on the oil crisis”..

It is probable that this political reality, in which the existence of successful community owned structures were an nuisance irritant, was a key driver of Max’s Electricity Industry Reforms but we are unlikely to be told the real truth.


Geoff Bertram

“The small retailers  who  would have made a competitive market  really fly basically packed up and left very quickly in 1998 as they saw how the Reforms were shaping up..”


 Part of the original rationale for the Reforms, clearly articulated by their architects here and the USA, was to disenfranchise people and make them tradeable commodities. Control of the intelligence associated with “retailing electricity” would enable the new owners develop lists of consumers and (a) market directly to them a wider range of products and (b) market the lists of consumers.

Probably over one million NZers have already been traded already this century and few would have been aware of the implications. As mentioned consumers have no rights to own information about their dwelling processes and broadcast it to agencies of their choice. This information is effectively controlled by their Bulk-gen electricity supplier.

When Max forced the people of Christchurch to sell its intelligence and customer lists TransAlta paid about $700 a customer. This was indicative of the the market trade. Contrary to what “experts” at EECA etc insist this price was not the purchase of the metering. Most of the meters in New Zealand had been brought freehold decades before the Reforms and had long been written off. The typical new meter could be imported for $NZ50 dollars or less. 

Max’s Reforms simply gifted crtical elements of the ripple control technology to the likes of TransAlta as load control had no value in the new framework. So that does not figure much in the prices of the trades either.  

The real value was seen to be in the people-trade and that is why TransAlta rapidy amassed 32% of all New Zealand Bulk-gen elecricity consumers onto its books.

The reality is the likes of Fresh Start (one of the small retailers Geoff alludes to) realised there was a quick buck to be made. They paid people ten bucks an hour to go around neigbourhoods like Porirua  offering people to sign up with Fresh Start and receive a $50 cash payment. They could then sell these lists on the “people market” to bigger retailers for hundreds of dollars. Which they did. 

The same ethos persists. Recently I was cold-called by Genesis Energy and encouraged to join them. They calculated my Bulk-gen electricity bills would be greater under them but offered me $70 cash to join them plus the opportunity to earn their “brownie points” under which the more I consumed and polluted the more carbon “brownie offsets” I “earned”. Similarly Contact Energy works with Flybuys  ‘developing customer loyalty’, which, in reality, means intelligence gathering for trading on customer information.



Max Bradford:

…Geoffs quite right – when the gentailers eh/or generators were allowed to vertically integrate into retailing which happened under Labour Geoff, not under National, when that happened then you had a situation where effectively the power companies - most of which are still Government owned - which act in concert- if not formally in concert then certainly they act together – they really stymied the development of real competition and until that issue is dealt with its going to be difficult to get true competetion to work again…”


The reality is Max’s Reforms enabled this type of vertical integration – its just that it takes a couple of years to happen.  

Max is correct: what he ignorantly calls “the power companies” do act together when it serves their short-term interests. All the big corporations collude, within and between sectors.

Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola collude to prevent any cultural shift that makes people question the wisdom of consuming large quantities of life-threatening sugared water –especially if you are a destitute farmer who is conned into trading the family hen for a bottle of “the real thing”. They divert the public focus from asking if the product is needed or safe by creating apparitions of competition and bebate over which of the two “products” is the best.  

Similarly butter and margarine corporations invest heavily in promoting debate as to which product is the best, rather than if both products are still necessary in an age of rich food seasonings. 

Similarly the bankers of the Bulk-gen electricity and fossil fuel

corporations maintain illusions of competition while colluding at every level to ensure legislation is not enacted that enables dwelling scale generation technology and carbon taxes.

This collusion is enabled by a culture of “commercial sensitivity” and copyright enforcement that is so dense that the collapse of our global civilisation is very iminent because copyright has effectively blocked and destroyed our most sustainable options. The statements of Max and Geoff and the Electricity Reform legislation evidence no cognisance of the profound risks we now face from escalating wealth inequity, pollution and mineral depletion. 

Sustainability lies in the existence of deep democracy/science, for these enable vital transparency and free flows of knowledge. Human beings forget this at their profound peril.The Electricity Reforms are designed to destroy science and prevent this empowerment. You only have to witness the current acceptance of the bankers’ equation “Energy = Bulk-gen electricity/fossil fuels” in all our media and academia to know the truth of this. 


“… In the 1980s model where Government owned the whole industry..”


This is classic illustration of the deceit, the dereliction of academic stanards, the denial of history and the devaluing of communities and democracy that pervades our universities, media and policy makers. The private corporation model was failing NZ in the early 1900s. So communities used their councils to buy the private “electric light” companies up so they could ensure everyone could have access to electrical products to drive their lighting, heating and other technologies.

Communities got together and formed Power Boards for the same reason.

Certainly the Government later on built and owned the Bulk-gen electricity plant in general and what is now TransPower. However much of this was designed to serve the interests of large corporations such as Comalco and arguably represents a net loss of wealth/loss of opportunity for communities. 

It is hard to quantify the wealth of the community-owned structures as much of it was intangible, involving the state of science,  community cohesion, the use of prime urban land, intelligence, potential to create/adopt new technology and the reduction of risk in times of war and civic threat from earthquakes, storms etc.  

The Electricity Reform legislation forced the transfer of these community owned assets to the bankers in a process that placed zero or minus value on signifcant elements of this wealth. Comprehensive accounting would suggest the Government actually owned a minor portion of an electrical system with a real value of hundreds of billions of dollars(NZ).  

Geoff’s statement, along with the general dogma of our academia and media, is a serious misrepresentation of history and adismissal of the hard work, generosity and stewardship of New Zealanders. 


“Geoff Bertram you are essentially saying that instead of creating a competitive situation with the you know the accompanying engenuity that is part of the market.. instead the Government, a series of Ministers, created a cozy club…”


“Well the Ministers allowed a cozy club to create itself..” 


Geoff is correct in as far as the Government created the Electricity Industry Reform legislation. However it is doubtful that any Minister now has the capacity to counter the very powerful forces behind the legislation. The new Labour-led adminstration in 2000 quickly found itself very much on the defensive and had to embark on a campaign to prove it was “business friendly” and the appointment of David Caygill to head the Government Inquiry into the Electricity Industry was a signal the Reform legislation would remain intact.  

When David Parker was appointed Minister of Energy he was put through the rumour mill wringer to ensure he became compliant. He sacked the Electricity Commission chairman Roy Hemmingway to keep the likes of Wachovia Bank/TransPower happy.  

The Prime Minister Helen Clark through the Minister of Finance, Michael Cullen, have admitted they were powerless to change the legislation. It is probably more helpful to say that Ministers are pretty helpless in our current academic, media and education culture to stop a cozy club forming itself.   

Re “the market”: when Afternoons, or almost anyone at Radio NZ talks of “the market” it is helpful to be aware they make a myopic use of the “market” symbol. Usually they use it as in the equation “The market = StockX or Mark Weldon Inc.( a company smaller than many mid sized Australian corporations). When they talk about “the markets” they only mean stock/share markets which, as we are now finding out may trade trillions of dollars but they only trade a small proportion of the real wealth (food, shelter, labour etc.) When they talk of the Electricity Market they refer to M-co, a small company that has only existed a meager 15 years.

 So most of the “ingenuity of the market” referred to exists outside Radio NZ’s definition of a market in the much greater world of humanity. And as I illustrated earlier the myopic markets referred to are fundamentally hostile to competition and ingenuity, especially the current Electricity Market which excludes the intelligent and democratic participation of 99% of New Zealanders. The tiny group acting for the bankers who can participate in the current Electricity Market evidence considerable ingenuity but it is only used to generate and sustain a façade of competition and freedom of choice for all.



“Max Bradford the former Minister of Energy..”


Max never was the Minister of Energy.

While Max is clearly confused about the nature of energy the reality is he is a rarity in this dumbed-down “energy conscious” age that the bankers have shrouded civilisation with this last four decades.

From memory he is the only Minister of minerals and electrical products who has not had the supreme arrogance or ignorance to symbolise himself as the “Minister of Energy” in three decades.  

As can be seen below he has a vision that energy is a subset of commerce and something extra to this universe drives industry. This is pretty inane but it represents a relatively low risk and minor  destruction of science compared to every other similar minister since about 1977.

Max Bradford

“Its so complex that few people can get their head around that”

“I am glad you said that professor”.


Six years ago Radio New Zealand interviewed one of the US architects of the NZ Electricity Industry Reforms. At the end of the interview with William Hogarth of the Harvard Electricity Policy Group Linda Clark, the host of Nine to Noon, complained that the Reforms are "fiendishly difficult" and talking about them "makes my head hurt". I wrote a hurried letter to her as a sanity salve, in which I explained that the Reforms are designed to be fiendishly difficult and are insane. I also pointed out that there are relatively simple and sane options - many of which existed before the Reforms.

Sometimes I despair for Radio New Zealand. As you can see from my note to it in 2003 it seems incapable of learning and persists year in year out in asking the same unhelpful questions.

In brief, it is unhelpful to ask, as Radio NZ Afternoons does, why the Electricity Industry Reforms are not working. It’s the wrong question because the Reforms are working extremely well and are achieving almost every objective in their design. Communities are now disenfranchised and heavily debt ridden and the oligarchy of bankers now control most of our options, including the design and use of our dwellings. It is more helpful to ask who are the Reforms designed to benefit?  

Re Hon Gerry Brownlee

It is clear from his symbolisation of himself as Minister of Energy and Resources that Hon Gerry Brownlee is a hopeless case too. Analysis of his language suggests he is a mindless agent for the bankers too and he will ensure they maximise their short-term profits through restricting national investment to vastly inefficient Bulk-generated electricity schemes such as flaring off remaining mineral gas reserves to generate Bulk-gen electricity products.

I rest my case on this statement made by Gerry on Morning Report on the same day as Afternoons discussion:

“It would be a very bold and stupid Energy Minister who would say they can control prices..” 

Just in is this article in the Business Spectator:

7:09 AM, 14 Apr 2009
Robert Gottliebsen

Small but powerful

 ….“Ceramic Fuel Cells has developed a small $6,000 home generator that has an 85 per cent power/heat conversion rate. A normal large power station has a 40 per cent power conversion rate. Ceramic’s high conversion figures have fascinated a whole range of European and Japanese power utilities who can see that the units can slash greenhouse emissions and halve the amount of gas required to generate home/office electricity and heating. And as the energy is produced in the home or office there is no transmission waste, although surplus electricity can be sold back to the grid….

…. Ceramic has a number of agreements with utilities that may generate major orders in Europe, but my experience is that dealing with utilities is very slow and frustrating….

 Two thoughts occur:

I wonder whatever happened to Southpower’s revolutionary “Whispergen” gas fired home generator?

 The NZ’s Electricity Industry Reforms are part of a chronic global malaise.

 May you enjoy the full bounty of your electrical potential.


The Sustainability Principle of Energy

“When a symbol use works to deny change it will materially alter the potential of the universe (energy) in a way that results in a reduction in the capacity of the symbol user to mirror reality. When a symbol use works for the acceptance of change it will increase the capacity of the symbol user to mirror reality.”

 Helpful reading

Empires of Light Edison, Tesla, Westinghouse and the Race to Electrify the World by Jill Jones

Power Play - The fight to control the world's electricity  by Sharon Beder

Converge New Zealand's Online Community Network 


Return to article


Return Electric Thinking home page

Return to Compassionate Curriculum - Our Electrical Beings.

Return to David Caygill Blog -NZ Electricity Commission

Return to Update Page

Return to Welcome Page