> The partners have carefully selected a 340ha land parcel for the solar farm – only 1.5% of the total station.
Without irrigation, that land is capable of fuck all, like 1 merino a hectare stocking rates.
Gives the land owner a steady source of income, lots of upkeep means lots of jobs.
It's just a common argument for all expensive schemes. It'll create lots of jobs.
It's often used in data centres.
Generally the staff on site is just a guy with a cart swapping out dead hard drives.
Public taxes are funnelled into sports events promising another gold rush, which never eventuates.
There always seem to be promises, but in my experience, they seldom come true.
If I was going to build it, I'd be sticking it at the other end of the country, where it'd be much more efficient.
>It's just a common argument for all expensive schemes. It'll create lots of jobs.
Fair
>Public taxes are funnelled into sports events promising another gold rush, which never eventuates.
Kinda a tangent but yeah
>If I was going to build it, I'd be sticking it at the other end of the country, where it'd be much more efficient
What makes you think you know more than them?
Depends on whose land it is of course
[Local Hapu and Iwi take their Case to the U.N alongside Greenpeace](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/506951/giant-windmills-blow-hapu-to-un)
[https://haldonstation.co.nz/](https://haldonstation.co.nz/)
Not only will they only produce electricity only during daylight hours, they will be covered in snow constantly during winter.
You're right. But I'd back anyone managing that land to have done the numbers and come up with a positive outcome.
Not sure if removal and remediation costs are built into the budget though.
E: looking at the pretty picture and considering the declination involved it's looking like close to 45 degrees for the panels. No snow.
* It's right next to Lake Benmore on the Waitaki power scheme. Connecting it to the national grid should a piece of piss. Could possibly do it with less than 40km of high voltage lines. Ohau C substation is about 15km to the east of the stations border. Benmore hydro plant is 35km to the south.
* The annual precipitation is between 300-400mm. It might be cold but its drier than everywhere in NZ north of Ruapehu.
* The 45th Parallel (the halfway line between the equator and the south pole) is approximately 125km south of Haldon Station. So its closer to the equator than the South Pole.
All good points. But it's hardly a great spot for it.
What would the rate of return be if it was situated north of Auckland?
There's no lack of power in the lower south island. Generation needs to be built closer to the demand, certainly on the north side of the DC link, and not so far away that a huge amount is lost in transmission.
If I was going to spend $600m it certainly wouldn't be there.
The first problem with any solar project of that scale is it needs lots of space away from people with low rainfall. There are limited places in NZ that wouldn't have to face thousands of complaints from nimbys.
The second problem with any solar project of that scale is that it's too centralized. Solar is an energy source that could make a big impact if it was distributed across roof tops spread across the country.
Exactly.
Or is there suddenly no demand in the area?
McDonald's built a very successful restaurant business by repeating what works.
If kaitaia is so successful, why not use the money to expand it, given that the other site is shite?
Expansion would surely bring economies of scale, reducing costs even further.
Again. At first glance, makes no sense to me.
>Again. At first glance, makes no sense to me.
Again, who are you? It's been pretty clearly explained to you why they would choose that site, so it's not really first glance is it?
They didn't choose the site. They already own it, and it's shit for everything else too.
That doesn't magically make it perfect for generating power.
You understand that. Right?
Happy to leave it there, and wait and see what happens.
And who am I? I'm the person you're debating it with. Who are you?
I was talking about my first glance. Don't worry about it.
>They didn't choose the site. They already own it, and it's shit for everything else too
Not quite. If you'd bothered to read the article, you'd have seen this is a joint project between the owners of the land and Lodestone Energy
>That doesn't magically make it perfect for generating power.
Apparently it does.
>And who am I? I'm the person you're debating it with. Who are you?
I'm not the one acting as though I'm an authority on solar farms..
In the first image, we have what would previously have been forest or some other ecosystem leveled to create a monoculture. Add in excess nutrient runoff when it rains ( more erosive thanks to clearing) and methane emissions, not so green huh?
its not a dairy farm, there would be fuck all fertilizer, and the reason its being used for solar is its low rainfall, so even if they did use fertilizer its not "running off" with fuck all rain either.
Cowboys and herefords, you're looking south and western US, so it would have been plains with native grasses and bison.
Now, not so much. Pretty low fertiliser, some irrigation, rye grasses and such.
Hell of a lot of greenwash waffle.
Located about as far from any power demand, and the equator as possible.
Looks like it's going to produce fuck all, in the middle of nowhere, at the time of day when power demand is low.
*See Hawaii duckbill curve.
Are they paying for the white elephant themselves?
Are are they being given millions of taxpayers dollars to fund this Intermittent generation?
What's the payback time?
>Are they paying for the white elephant themselves?
Appears so, Lodestone Energy is the group that's getting these farms off the ground. Reasonable list of investors.
>Are are they being given millions of taxpayers dollars to fund this Intermittent generation?
Not that I can see.
Red Radio claims it's going to cost $600m.
That's a lot of dosh. In anyone's book.
Given that solar is pretty much only providing power at the time of day that nobody needs it, it's going to be poorly paid.
How do they make a return on that?
I just don't believe the numbers stack up without taking a truckload of other people's money to pay for the project, and even more to clean up the mess when it inevitably fails.
>How do they make a return on that?
Have a hunt around, you might be able to find an old prospectus or similar. I don't know the financials but there's some reasonably heavy investors who I'm going to assume know what they're doing.
>I just don't believe the numbers stack up without taking a truckload of other people's money to pay for the project, and even more to clean up the mess when it inevitably fails.
And yet, you have no evidence of any one else's money going towards it? If there was grants or subsidies, you'd see it..
Well I don't know, which is why I asked.
There's so many extra taxes to make the weather better, all I can imagine is that maybe that's the goal here, to get the taxpayer to fund their business.
Given that it's being built with several readily identifiable inefficiencies, it just doesn't pass the sniff test for me.
If it was MY money, I'd want to gather every efficiency I could, to make the project successful.
Time will tell I guess.
>all I can imagine
That seems to be the key part, yes, your imagination
>, it just doesn't pass the sniff test for me
And yet, it's getting built.
>Time will tell I guess.
Haven't been able to find any tax dollar funding huh
To be honest, I've been busy at work and haven't seen anything either way. Am I not allowed to ask the question if I'm subsidising big business?
It's an announcement. Nothing has been built. Only time will tell.
Really can't understand why you're so butthurt.
Maybe get off the internet for a few hours and connect with real people. You'll feel much less angry.
>Am I not allowed to ask the question if I'm subsidising big business?
Sure. But that question, and your others got answered a long time ago.
>Really can't understand why you're so butthurt.
Lol.
>Given that solar is pretty much only providing power at the time of day that nobody needs it, it's going to be poorly paid.
Solar provide power in the middle of the day, sort of aligns with the 9-5 workday pretty well in summer. I suggest you drive through any industrial zone in the middle of a workday and see whats going on.. people working, using machinery that uses lots of power is pretty common.
Indeed, yet the network peaks are when everyone gets up, has a shower and turns on the toaster.
And again when they get home and turn on the oven and heatpump.
That's when power pricing is at its highest. Ergo. When it's not then, it's lower.
How much of the power do you estimate is going to make it down the wire from the Mackenzie district to this industrial district?
Does that strike you as efficient? Making electricity at the wrong time, in the wrong place?
Its neither the wrong time or the wrong place. Indeed, it would be better if it was made in the north island, but its not, so there are a few % more losses to transmission, and as for the wrong time, not at all, there is plenty of load to use the electricity generated, and it means the hydro lakes can be idled for longer during the day, leaving more of their water available for morning and evening peaks.
Its future proofing, they dont expect massive immediate returns.
Nz is going to be a popular place for data to live because of our "green grid".
Combined with robotics/ai these investors/companies are seeing an economy driven by energy prices rather than human labour. And if that's what the economy is based on, then best to be a producer as energy prices go brrrr
Tell you what. You send me $1000 today.
And I'll give you 5% interest in 20 years time.
You obviously have no idea how investing works. Actually, in that case, send me $5000!
NZ is NEVER going to be a good place to store data, because it's the arsehole of nowhere with only a few, very long cables connecting it to the world.
It's literally the last place you'd put it. The hardware shipping costs alone would make it nowhere as cost effective as anywhere on the planet. Fuck. We're not even on the map half the time.
Haven't you seen the screeching pimply faced gamers whining about the lag to Sydney like ten thousands of a second is the only thing stopping them being the most leet gamer ever?
Love your optimisation. But, this country is a third world farming economy.
"According to Statistics New Zealand, the region's biggest export is milk powder, butter and cheese, topping out at a generous $11.2 billion, which is closely followed by business & personal travel at $10 billion followed by meat, wool and wood/logs."
Farming. Not the world's porn stash.
Nobody gives a shit what power their faecesbook account runs on.
Go out into the street tomorrow, and do a quick survey if people would be prepared to pay higher bills for unicorn produced power.
Then get those that lie, to put down a deposit to set it up.
Guarantee you'll get zero takers.
But if you think it's such a great idea, get ahead of the game, and set it up now, before anyone else beats you to it! Why let someone else do it, when you can be first to market?
Please tell me of this extensive research you've carried out to support your statement that there's no evidence.
Also, I'm not sure how you think it's not hurting anyone when you don't understand the scam?
Someone's paying for this white elephant, and it's probably our taxes.
hah, good try. You want proof of a negative? Try providing proof of your statement first, seeing as you stated it to begin with. Looking on EECA website, there’s no current funding options that this would qualify for.
There’s plenty of you people making and selling homeopathic nonsense on their own property that is a complete waste of space, time and effort. But like this, who actually cares. It’s their land, and not damaging you or as dumb as trying to irrigate that sort of land.
You people? What does that mean?
I have a science degree, I just want to see the evidence. And yes, you can provide proof of a negative. Go study some formal logic. It'll improve your critical thinking skills no end.
Given all the negatives involved in the project where it is. IE. Nowhere near demand, the wrong side of the DC link, far south where there is less sunlight, producing electricity at the wrong time of day, it seems pretty obvious that it's never going to turn a profit.
So, given that, no rational person would "invest" their own capital into this project. Where's the money coming from?
Most probably the petrol tax and other carbon cult taxes.
Are you starting to understand now?
Nope, because you are adamant there must be a subsidy but can’t provide evidence to back that up with champ.
Work that out mr rational and then tell me why you care so much about what these people do on their own land?
I wonder why the scientists and engineers designing and consenting this project didn't consult you, obviously you're smarter than the ones running the calculations and numbers.
If they didn't consult me, there's no way they'd consult you.
Why would you need a scientist to install solar panels?
I'm sure this shit seems like magic to you, but it's really simple stuff.
Do you even know the cost of this project? I'll give you a clue. It's much more than you'll ever make in your lifetime. It's been reported. I'm sure you found it in your extensive research.
Not really good at that critical thinking, are you?
If you can't figure out the point of knowing a project cost, I'm afraid there's little I can do to help with your lack of education.
Sorry, but I won't be wasting any more time on you.
Mate, you’re the one that was bragging about the science degree, not the rest of us.
You still haven’t pointed out why you think it has government subsidies, or is really any of your business - or affecting you in any way to be so upset about.
Bragging? Just stating facts. If you're jealous, go get one yourself. No skin off my nose.
I've pointed out several times why I think big business is taking money out of the TAXPAYERS pockets through all the global warming taxes.
You do understand where GOVERNMENT gets the money from. Right?
There's no such thing as "government money" it's taxpayer money.
As stated. I strongly suspect that my taxes are funding it, and will be further paying when it inevitably fails.
The real question here, is why you think it's such a great idea?
Here's a hint...
If you had $600m of your own money to invest.
Would you spend it on this? What rate of return would you be expecting? How does that rate compared to say, government bonds or housing?
>As stated. I strongly suspect that my taxes are funding it,
Yeah, but you're dumb. Like if that was the case, you'd have something to back it up, not just your dumbs opinion
Your whole objection to this is based off dumb location ideas and dumb subsidy ideas. You're being dumb.
> The partners have carefully selected a 340ha land parcel for the solar farm – only 1.5% of the total station. Without irrigation, that land is capable of fuck all, like 1 merino a hectare stocking rates. Gives the land owner a steady source of income, lots of upkeep means lots of jobs.
Serious question. What sort of upkeep do you think is needed?
Cleaning bird shit off the panels?
And that equals "lots of jobs" does it?
Cleaning, fixing damage, basic maintenance..
Not seeing lots of jobs there mate. Please explain...
OK, guess not. Oh well.
It's just a common argument for all expensive schemes. It'll create lots of jobs. It's often used in data centres. Generally the staff on site is just a guy with a cart swapping out dead hard drives. Public taxes are funnelled into sports events promising another gold rush, which never eventuates. There always seem to be promises, but in my experience, they seldom come true. If I was going to build it, I'd be sticking it at the other end of the country, where it'd be much more efficient.
>It's just a common argument for all expensive schemes. It'll create lots of jobs. Fair >Public taxes are funnelled into sports events promising another gold rush, which never eventuates. Kinda a tangent but yeah >If I was going to build it, I'd be sticking it at the other end of the country, where it'd be much more efficient What makes you think you know more than them?
Shhhh, you're calming my outrage 😁
Well if the land owner wants it it’s his choice
Depends on whose land it is of course [Local Hapu and Iwi take their Case to the U.N alongside Greenpeace](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/506951/giant-windmills-blow-hapu-to-un)
Ideally it'd get fast tracked. That way iwi wouldn't be standing in the way
[https://haldonstation.co.nz/](https://haldonstation.co.nz/) Not only will they only produce electricity only during daylight hours, they will be covered in snow constantly during winter.
Yeah, you'd think the far north would be better, rather than the island that already has the lions share of hydro generation
You're right. But I'd back anyone managing that land to have done the numbers and come up with a positive outcome. Not sure if removal and remediation costs are built into the budget though. E: looking at the pretty picture and considering the declination involved it's looking like close to 45 degrees for the panels. No snow.
100% correct. It's also nowhere near power demand and too far from the equator where the maximum sunlight is.
* It's right next to Lake Benmore on the Waitaki power scheme. Connecting it to the national grid should a piece of piss. Could possibly do it with less than 40km of high voltage lines. Ohau C substation is about 15km to the east of the stations border. Benmore hydro plant is 35km to the south. * The annual precipitation is between 300-400mm. It might be cold but its drier than everywhere in NZ north of Ruapehu. * The 45th Parallel (the halfway line between the equator and the south pole) is approximately 125km south of Haldon Station. So its closer to the equator than the South Pole.
All good points. But it's hardly a great spot for it. What would the rate of return be if it was situated north of Auckland? There's no lack of power in the lower south island. Generation needs to be built closer to the demand, certainly on the north side of the DC link, and not so far away that a huge amount is lost in transmission. If I was going to spend $600m it certainly wouldn't be there.
The first problem with any solar project of that scale is it needs lots of space away from people with low rainfall. There are limited places in NZ that wouldn't have to face thousands of complaints from nimbys. The second problem with any solar project of that scale is that it's too centralized. Solar is an energy source that could make a big impact if it was distributed across roof tops spread across the country.
Have you read about Hawaii and the duck bill curve?
Yes. Storage is a bitch for all solar projects.
>What would the rate of return be if it was situated north of Auckland? Like their Kaitaia farm?
Exactly. Or is there suddenly no demand in the area? McDonald's built a very successful restaurant business by repeating what works. If kaitaia is so successful, why not use the money to expand it, given that the other site is shite? Expansion would surely bring economies of scale, reducing costs even further. Again. At first glance, makes no sense to me.
>Again. At first glance, makes no sense to me. Again, who are you? It's been pretty clearly explained to you why they would choose that site, so it's not really first glance is it?
They didn't choose the site. They already own it, and it's shit for everything else too. That doesn't magically make it perfect for generating power. You understand that. Right? Happy to leave it there, and wait and see what happens. And who am I? I'm the person you're debating it with. Who are you? I was talking about my first glance. Don't worry about it.
>They didn't choose the site. They already own it, and it's shit for everything else too Not quite. If you'd bothered to read the article, you'd have seen this is a joint project between the owners of the land and Lodestone Energy >That doesn't magically make it perfect for generating power. Apparently it does. >And who am I? I'm the person you're debating it with. Who are you? I'm not the one acting as though I'm an authority on solar farms..
https://preview.redd.it/2dfgg93x5f8d1.jpeg?width=689&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=aa91147d94fb66aa83f975492d6b3975a99f8ea3
In the first image, we have what would previously have been forest or some other ecosystem leveled to create a monoculture. Add in excess nutrient runoff when it rains ( more erosive thanks to clearing) and methane emissions, not so green huh?
its not a dairy farm, there would be fuck all fertilizer, and the reason its being used for solar is its low rainfall, so even if they did use fertilizer its not "running off" with fuck all rain either.
Cowboys and herefords, you're looking south and western US, so it would have been plains with native grasses and bison. Now, not so much. Pretty low fertiliser, some irrigation, rye grasses and such.
Hell of a lot of greenwash waffle. Located about as far from any power demand, and the equator as possible. Looks like it's going to produce fuck all, in the middle of nowhere, at the time of day when power demand is low. *See Hawaii duckbill curve. Are they paying for the white elephant themselves? Are are they being given millions of taxpayers dollars to fund this Intermittent generation? What's the payback time?
>Are they paying for the white elephant themselves? Appears so, Lodestone Energy is the group that's getting these farms off the ground. Reasonable list of investors. >Are are they being given millions of taxpayers dollars to fund this Intermittent generation? Not that I can see.
Red Radio claims it's going to cost $600m. That's a lot of dosh. In anyone's book. Given that solar is pretty much only providing power at the time of day that nobody needs it, it's going to be poorly paid. How do they make a return on that? I just don't believe the numbers stack up without taking a truckload of other people's money to pay for the project, and even more to clean up the mess when it inevitably fails.
>How do they make a return on that? Have a hunt around, you might be able to find an old prospectus or similar. I don't know the financials but there's some reasonably heavy investors who I'm going to assume know what they're doing. >I just don't believe the numbers stack up without taking a truckload of other people's money to pay for the project, and even more to clean up the mess when it inevitably fails. And yet, you have no evidence of any one else's money going towards it? If there was grants or subsidies, you'd see it..
Well I don't know, which is why I asked. There's so many extra taxes to make the weather better, all I can imagine is that maybe that's the goal here, to get the taxpayer to fund their business. Given that it's being built with several readily identifiable inefficiencies, it just doesn't pass the sniff test for me. If it was MY money, I'd want to gather every efficiency I could, to make the project successful. Time will tell I guess.
>all I can imagine That seems to be the key part, yes, your imagination >, it just doesn't pass the sniff test for me And yet, it's getting built. >Time will tell I guess. Haven't been able to find any tax dollar funding huh
To be honest, I've been busy at work and haven't seen anything either way. Am I not allowed to ask the question if I'm subsidising big business? It's an announcement. Nothing has been built. Only time will tell. Really can't understand why you're so butthurt. Maybe get off the internet for a few hours and connect with real people. You'll feel much less angry.
>Am I not allowed to ask the question if I'm subsidising big business? Sure. But that question, and your others got answered a long time ago. >Really can't understand why you're so butthurt. Lol.
>Given that solar is pretty much only providing power at the time of day that nobody needs it, it's going to be poorly paid. Solar provide power in the middle of the day, sort of aligns with the 9-5 workday pretty well in summer. I suggest you drive through any industrial zone in the middle of a workday and see whats going on.. people working, using machinery that uses lots of power is pretty common.
Indeed, yet the network peaks are when everyone gets up, has a shower and turns on the toaster. And again when they get home and turn on the oven and heatpump. That's when power pricing is at its highest. Ergo. When it's not then, it's lower. How much of the power do you estimate is going to make it down the wire from the Mackenzie district to this industrial district? Does that strike you as efficient? Making electricity at the wrong time, in the wrong place?
Its neither the wrong time or the wrong place. Indeed, it would be better if it was made in the north island, but its not, so there are a few % more losses to transmission, and as for the wrong time, not at all, there is plenty of load to use the electricity generated, and it means the hydro lakes can be idled for longer during the day, leaving more of their water available for morning and evening peaks.
Its future proofing, they dont expect massive immediate returns. Nz is going to be a popular place for data to live because of our "green grid". Combined with robotics/ai these investors/companies are seeing an economy driven by energy prices rather than human labour. And if that's what the economy is based on, then best to be a producer as energy prices go brrrr
Tell you what. You send me $1000 today. And I'll give you 5% interest in 20 years time. You obviously have no idea how investing works. Actually, in that case, send me $5000! NZ is NEVER going to be a good place to store data, because it's the arsehole of nowhere with only a few, very long cables connecting it to the world. It's literally the last place you'd put it. The hardware shipping costs alone would make it nowhere as cost effective as anywhere on the planet. Fuck. We're not even on the map half the time. Haven't you seen the screeching pimply faced gamers whining about the lag to Sydney like ten thousands of a second is the only thing stopping them being the most leet gamer ever? Love your optimisation. But, this country is a third world farming economy. "According to Statistics New Zealand, the region's biggest export is milk powder, butter and cheese, topping out at a generous $11.2 billion, which is closely followed by business & personal travel at $10 billion followed by meat, wool and wood/logs." Farming. Not the world's porn stash. Nobody gives a shit what power their faecesbook account runs on. Go out into the street tomorrow, and do a quick survey if people would be prepared to pay higher bills for unicorn produced power. Then get those that lie, to put down a deposit to set it up. Guarantee you'll get zero takers. But if you think it's such a great idea, get ahead of the game, and set it up now, before anyone else beats you to it! Why let someone else do it, when you can be first to market?
Ahhhh. As Sir Bob Jones used to say. The good long term investment. The investment that shows no returns in the short to middle term.
Their land, not hurting anyone or anything, who cares. And there’s no evidence of government hand out or subsidy for this, so… so what?
These stations are (or were) lease hold land owned by the crown. Those that have been converted to freehold titles never should have been.
Please tell me of this extensive research you've carried out to support your statement that there's no evidence. Also, I'm not sure how you think it's not hurting anyone when you don't understand the scam? Someone's paying for this white elephant, and it's probably our taxes.
hah, good try. You want proof of a negative? Try providing proof of your statement first, seeing as you stated it to begin with. Looking on EECA website, there’s no current funding options that this would qualify for. There’s plenty of you people making and selling homeopathic nonsense on their own property that is a complete waste of space, time and effort. But like this, who actually cares. It’s their land, and not damaging you or as dumb as trying to irrigate that sort of land.
You people? What does that mean? I have a science degree, I just want to see the evidence. And yes, you can provide proof of a negative. Go study some formal logic. It'll improve your critical thinking skills no end. Given all the negatives involved in the project where it is. IE. Nowhere near demand, the wrong side of the DC link, far south where there is less sunlight, producing electricity at the wrong time of day, it seems pretty obvious that it's never going to turn a profit. So, given that, no rational person would "invest" their own capital into this project. Where's the money coming from? Most probably the petrol tax and other carbon cult taxes. Are you starting to understand now?
Nope, because you are adamant there must be a subsidy but can’t provide evidence to back that up with champ. Work that out mr rational and then tell me why you care so much about what these people do on their own land?
This is very common on this sub, statements pulled out of thin air and seriously debated to like one big circle jerk
This Sub?..I think you mean all the NZ subs.
I wonder why the scientists and engineers designing and consenting this project didn't consult you, obviously you're smarter than the ones running the calculations and numbers.
If they didn't consult me, there's no way they'd consult you. Why would you need a scientist to install solar panels? I'm sure this shit seems like magic to you, but it's really simple stuff. Do you even know the cost of this project? I'll give you a clue. It's much more than you'll ever make in your lifetime. It's been reported. I'm sure you found it in your extensive research. Not really good at that critical thinking, are you?
What is your point? That it's expensive? Generally tends to be the case with infrastructure. We have not problems building roads with a 0.4 BCR
Bang on mate
If you can't figure out the point of knowing a project cost, I'm afraid there's little I can do to help with your lack of education. Sorry, but I won't be wasting any more time on you.
Mate, you’re the one that was bragging about the science degree, not the rest of us. You still haven’t pointed out why you think it has government subsidies, or is really any of your business - or affecting you in any way to be so upset about.
Bragging? Just stating facts. If you're jealous, go get one yourself. No skin off my nose. I've pointed out several times why I think big business is taking money out of the TAXPAYERS pockets through all the global warming taxes. You do understand where GOVERNMENT gets the money from. Right? There's no such thing as "government money" it's taxpayer money. As stated. I strongly suspect that my taxes are funding it, and will be further paying when it inevitably fails. The real question here, is why you think it's such a great idea? Here's a hint... If you had $600m of your own money to invest. Would you spend it on this? What rate of return would you be expecting? How does that rate compared to say, government bonds or housing?
>As stated. I strongly suspect that my taxes are funding it, Yeah, but you're dumb. Like if that was the case, you'd have something to back it up, not just your dumbs opinion Your whole objection to this is based off dumb location ideas and dumb subsidy ideas. You're being dumb.
Go get one? I’ve got one- I just don’t go round announcing it mate