IPENZ Engineers New Zealand

HOME > publications > engineering-NZ > volume53-1998 > 1998-04-apr > OFFICE

Back to Publications

New Zealand Engineering 1998 March

public relations </h3>   When Logic Takes a Holiday <HR>Ross Burrell is a public relations consultant with 14 years experience in the energy industry <TABLE WIDTH="100%" > <TR VALIGN=TOP> <TD ALIGN=LEFT VALIGN=TOP>Engineers are being exhorted on all fronts to communicate, consult, listen and generally be more open about proposed developments. But at the end of the day, what difference does it really make? There is good reason for openness and honesty, but it is dangerous and naïve to presume that logic will prevail. One of the biggest mistakes engineers make is to assume that people opposed to a project will change their minds once they are appraised of the facts. However, in most cases, no amount of information or dialogue is going to result in 100 percent support. Public opposition to the Telecom cellular sites and proposed wind power projects clearly show that logic is generally the first victim in any public debate. Unspoken, and underlying much of the opposition, is an anti-progress sentiment which is often overlooked. Wind contradiction The issue of wind power typifies many of the frustrations facing engineers in their efforts to communicate. From a national perspective the case for wind power is extremely strong. But when you get organisations like Greenpeace on national television saying Mercury should be looking to invest more in renewable energy sources and then refusing, as a matter of policy, to support individual commercial developments it seems to make little sense. Most engineers are now familiar with the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) syndrome, where communities may understand the overall reasoning behind the development but just don't want it anywhere nearby. A recent survey from the University of California Davis found that wind drew a greater NIMBY response than nuclear, fossil fuel-fired, and biomass plants. And as US wind energy advocate Paul Gipe told the NZ Wind Energy Association Conference last year, it takes only one determined individual to stymie a project. Wind power advocates could and should rightly ask where is the sense of proportionality here? With responses like this can we really rely on communities and local authorities to put wind power in its proper perspective? ECNZ has consulted widely with the Makara community on plans to build a wind farm in the area but has this really made any difference? There is still reported to be significant public opposition. There are some who would say that it is not so much consultation which is at fault in not obtaining whole hearted support but the way in which the process is undertaken. They say that the engineers do not generally have good communication skills and fail to speak in a language that lay people can understand. These are valid points but obviously not the complete story. Opponents to the Makara project have reportedly latched onto the visual impact and noise issues, but it is a matter of conjecture whether anything could be done to turn the residents around. Recently, the issue of "infrasound" has been introduced into the debate. Infrasound is apparently low pitched noise we cannot hear with the human ear but is there all the same. One source said many just don't want turbines nearby and the noise and visual aspects are just a convenient scapegoat. New Zealand Wind Energy Association chairman and DesignPower consultant Paul van Lieshout is naturally concerned at the challenges facing the development of wind power in New Zealand. He is a strong advocate of consultation and communication but says the same process of consultation has to be undertaken for a small wind project as for a major fossil fuel plant. Because of the often relatively small scale of wind projects this process adds considerable cost to a project and can threaten its economic viability. Project developers need to somehow assess whether consultation will achieve their desired result. This is not an exhortation to withhold information from the public, but rather not to place too high an expectation on the consultative process. Resource management In some cases rather than expect to generate 100 percent public support through consultation a more fruitful approach would appear to be to address the Resource Management Act (RMA) head on. Wind projects are generally not listed as "permitted activities" in district plans, and therefore require a resource consent. If the project is considered to have "minor adverse effects" it is treated on a non-notified basis, provided consents are obtained from directly affected neighbours. Otherwise, it must go through a publicly-notified application procedure. On this basis of a district council judgement call, the proposed development at Baring Head by the former EnergyDirect proceeded to a hearing and failed to obtain a resource consent while Wairarapa Electricity's Hau Nui development was given the green light on a non-notified basis. </td> <TD ALIGN=RIGHT><IMG SRC="../gifs/makara3.GIF" NOSAVE HEIGHT=147 WIDTH=102 ALIGN=CENTER> <IMG SRC="../gifs/makara5.GIF" NOSAVE BORDER=0 HEIGHT=147 WIDTH=102> <IMG SRC="../gifs/makara6.GIF" NOSAVE BORDER=0 HEIGHT=166 WIDTH=113> <IMG SRC="../gifs/makara2.GIF" NOSAVE BORDER=0 HEIGHT=147 WIDTH=102> <IMG SRC="../gifs/makara2.GIF" NOSAVE BORDER=0 HEIGHT=147 WIDTH=102> <DIV ALIGN=right><IMG SRC="../gifs/makara7.GIF" NOSAVE HEIGHT=146 WIDTH=102 ALIGN=CENTER></DIV> </TD> </TR> </TABLE> Instead of relying on the discretion of a particular council, however, one of the better courses of action may be to seek amendments to district plans. Resource Management specialist and partner of law firm Bell Gully, Don Turley, argues that the RMA is not a problem for those who take the time to understand how it works. "Section 105 explicitly states that a non-conforming activity will not be granted a resource consent unless the adverse effects on the environment will be minor or granting the consent will not be contrary to the objectives and policies of the relevant district plan or proposed plan. For this reason, in many cases, the better course of action is to seek a change to the district plan." Mr Turley says developers, in general, should also take a proactive approach to mediation. He says the Environment Court has shown enthusiasm for mediation as an integral part of the planning process. "It is increasingly likely that those who have not tried to resolve issues in this way will find themselves directed to mediation by the Environment Court before they are allowed to progress the matter." In a wider context, as noted by Crown Counsel Bronwyn Arthur in November 1997 issue of New Zealand Engineering, there is also scope for the Government to provide guidance to the courts by issuing a national policy statement which could encompass issues such as wind power. Although the policy statement cannot state rules, Ms Arthur says "case law suggests that policies to all intents can be rules". Deeper currents Although amending district plans and calling for a national policy statement from Government seem to be among the more practical solutions there is no doubt that the campaign to educate and inform the public should continue. The key, however, is that as well as addressing the specifics of any particular project there needs to be an understanding of some of the deeper currents running through modern society. Some would argue that underlying opposition to many developments is based on a widespread anti-progress sentiment. This anti-science, anti-progress trend has been viewed with growing alarm by learned people from around the world. In 1995 it prompted a high-level US conference, "The Flight from Science and Reason", which was attended by more than 200 scientists, doctors and humanists. In their book Science and Retreat from Reason, authors John Gillott and Manjit Kumar say today's anti-progress trends are located with the broader context of social pessimism and fear. They argue that society now has low expectations of what can be achieved in any sphere of human activity. "It is fearful of experimentation, risk-taking and change in general. People today are more inclined to deify nature and condemn human attempts to control it. There is no sense of the possibility of progress, defined by a nineteenth-century French dictionary as the idea that `humanity is perfectible and it moves incessantly from less good to better, from ignorance to science, from barbarism to civilisation'. "For those many, science and technology remain practical necessities; but they reject any association between science and human advancement. The very idea of progress is now seen as at best misguided, at worst destructive. Underlying this rejection of progress is a lack of faith in human judgement and human abilities." Gillott and Kumar say one specific dimension of contemporary culture that strengthens anti-science trends is environmental politics and the sanctification of nature that goes with it. Anna Bramwell, who wrote the book The Fading of the Greens, notes that until 1960, `nature' was seen as the source of inequality, while attempts to transcend nature through science were seen as bringing equality. From 1965 to the present, she argues, the situation has been reversed. `Nature' now signifies equality, and attempts to transcend nature are seen as a source of inequality. The challenge facing communicators in engineering or science is not just to address local issues relevant to particular projects but to directly address the culture of conservatism and low expectations which dominate society. Or at very least, consider the bigger picture, when seeking to win hearts and minds. <HR> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="30"><img src="/ipenz/images/front/1x1tr.gif" alt="Blank space" width="30" height="50"></td> <td width="160" valign="top" align="left"><img src="/ipenz/images/front/1x1tr.gif" alt="Blank space" width="160" height="50"></td> <td width="20"><img src="/ipenz/images/front/1x1tr.gif" alt="Blank space" width="20" height="50"></td> <td width="400" align="left" valign="top" class="bodya"><img src="/ipenz/images/front/1x1tr.gif" alt="Blank space" width="400" height="50"></td> <td align="right" valign="top" width="250"> </td> </tr> </table> <div id="footer"> © 1996 - 2010 IPENZ </div> </div> </body> </html>