I'm confused. How about you?

In an article in tonights Marlborough Express, there were a few interesting observations.
Firstly, there's been a resource consent granted to use a Defender fan on a block out Seddon way. I'm going to assume that this means that the new Defender has been tested and has passed the requirements under the proposed plan changes. Good news for them.
I'm still a bit in the dark of course. I mean they appear to have a new fan doing the rounds, but it's a picture of the old one that appears on their web site along with their historical shocking propaganda 'testing' data from the University of Canterbury. It never fails to surprise me that people can spend a bazillion dollars on R&D and still expect to put up a public 'face' on a web site with incorrect data and in one case even a missing image.
Secondly, there's some information on the long running battle up the Waihopai with Waihopai Holdings or Mount Riley as the parent company's called. To be brutal, it would appear as if the person writing the article has got things a bit topsy turvy, unless of course there's been some RADICAL changes in the way that bun fight has developed. Interesting to see that they appear to have been granted a right to use one fan and are applying for another?? I thought this was all heading to court to sort out, so perhaps there's been some movement.
This all smells a bit fishy and half-baked fish at that.

Who's winning here? Not the Grape Growers. Not the Sleepless Residents.

The Marlborough Express is reporting that the recent Hearing decision on the Marlborough frost fan rules is being appealed by the NZ Winegrowers and Horticulture NZ.
Hardly a surprise, since in these troubled times of receivership and strife, the only people who can make money are those who create strife. Bureaucrats.

Is it just me, or was there a considerable amout of trumpeting recently about the significant increase in export earnings from the wine industry?
Wine export growth outshines all others

New Zealand wines have gone from zero to hero
Yet for some reason, there are vineyards going down the gurgler and sav blanc may as well be hemlock
Wine Country over a barrel?
Twenty drinks to avoid in 2010

Wine hard to sell

Say it with me.... Dichotomy.

So in these incredibly successful, but financially crippling times, lets plough money into Bureaucracy. Here's the trick. Hype the profit margin and skim the surplus.

Grape growers sign off on industry levy

You're a grape grower under financial pressure. You voted to increase the levies to an organisation that skims money off you via an act of parliament right?

So back to Court they go. 'Cos that's where the money is. It won't matter if you're fighting a battle that is lost already. It's not the winning that counts. It's the fighting. I'd be increasing the levies again. They'll need it. If it's not here, it'll be in Tasman or the Hurunui or Otago or Hawkes Bay. Money going down the drain faster than 2008 Sav Blanc.

Why is there a Defender Blade on an Orchard Rite pole?

So, why would we be seeing a Defender blade on an Orchard Rite pole on one of Royce McKean’s properties?

As I stated yesterday, the simple answer is that there is a new broom coming in terms of noise regulations and like the shrewd businessman Royce is, there is no doubt that he will be hedging his bets to provide options if he finds himself in a tight corner and being forced to actually COMPLY with a noise level.

But that’s not all.

This is an Orchard Rite pole, this is an Orchard Rite supplied engine and control and monitoring system. Royce went with Orchard Rite because  “The length of time they’ve been in business and what they’d be like to work with longer term also contributed to our decision that these are the type of people we want to do business with.”

Yet what have Orchard Rite done lately to move their product forward? Sure there are commercial considerations to weigh up. Can we make it cheaper? Can we provide more coverage? I don’t know if Orchard Rite fans provide any advantage in either of these areas, but one thing is for sure, reducing the noise of these fans has not been Orchard Rites primary focus. They are renowned for being the noisiest of any fans and while some might blame the installer or the owner for turning the fans up to an unreasonable level, Orchard Rites attention to noise has been nil.

While the Amarillo has morphed into the Defender in an effort to get quieter and the already quiet 4 bladed Frost Boss has pushed the envelope with the C-49. What have Orchard Rite done?

Good news.

Their research and development department has been hard at work. They have burned the midnight oil, conducted countless aerodynamic tests and I hear that they used a supercomputer normally reserved for nuclear detonation simulations to finally produce this…

 So what are you looking at?

Well, I’m no expert, but it looks like they took normal blades and extended them by inserting a longer centre section.

Seriously, this was installed next to one of the Marlborough noise hotspots in the Wairau valley. This is Orchard Rites answer to noise problems with frost fans.

For crying out loud. Is it any wonder that Royce McKean is going to risk voiding a warranty on an Orchard Rite frost fan by trying the opposition’s new blade when this is the best that Orchard Rite can come up with?

I can only hope that this is the product of Spanners Watson the retarded South Island mechanic rather than an example of the finest engineering brains of a country that sent men to the moon.

Pathetic.

A single 11 hour frost event is not strange, but this fan is.

Royce McKean and Waiata Vineyards have often annoyed the residents around the Hurunui with their massive installation of Orchard Rite frost fans.

What a marvellous surprise it was to find the following (2007) article in the ‘Fruitfed News’ that espoused the wisdom and foresightedness of Royce in purchasing 53 of the 3000 series Orchard Rite fans for his Waipara vineyard.

This is the same model fan that when measured by Hegley Acoustics in 2005 could only meet the old noise restrictions of the Marlborough District Council if wound down to the point of uselessness. So you can safely assume that they have never been run at this speed and for some reason the residents have complained. The nerve.

But let’s take a moment to have another look at the ‘Fruitfed News’ article again.

What’s that they say?

“The 53 Orchard-Rite wind machines installed on Waipara vineyard this winter have already proven their worth during an eleven hour frost event says viticultural manager Dan Riddell.”

Gosh that’s interesting. You see one of the basic tenants that’s being pushed by the NZ Winegrowers Association is that because the fans are used for such a small amount of time, the disruption to sleep is minimal. In fact during the recent frost fan hearing in Marlborough, figures of less than 10 hours use in a year were submitted by growers.

That must be comforting to know for those Hurunui district residents who suffered through a single 11 hour event. This is not a cumulative total over a season. This is one night. One night without sleep and then back to work the next day. Driving to and from work, operating heavy machinery, trying to make decisions while sleep impaired. ONE night is intolerable. And it’s never just one night is it?

Good show.

What about Orchard Rite? Did they sell Royce a pup? In a quote from the advertising Royce went with them because “Not only were the technical considerations important, but also the philosophies of how the Orchard-Rite people do business. Ultimately, we had a lot of confidence in the key people at Orchard-Rite and that they’d stand behind their products.”

That’s given me a warm glow.

However, it was interesting to note in a picture donated from an interested citizen that Royce has begun testing a different fan up the Wairau Valley. If you look closely on one of his noisy Orchard Rites, you’ll see a brand new Defender blade sitting on it.

Now, to those not in the know, this is taking two competing companies and making their evil love child. To be perfectly honest that’s not fair to the Defender, since in spite of my serious misgivings about this blade and its woeful testing, there would be no doubt in my mind that it would be a generation ahead of the Orchard Rite blade it replaced (not that being less noisy than an Orchard Rite is anything to crow about).

So the question remains, why would you do it?

Well there’s the obvious answer and there’s the one that Orchard Rite would rather you didn’t know.

The obvious reason would be that Royce knows full well that the jig is up and that his current fans are stupidly noisy and are likely to get dealt to by the new raft of Council rules being enacted all over the place.

I will let you know what the less obvious and far more worrying reason is tomorrow.

NZ Winegrowers is your nose growing?

12 July 2010.

It was released in the press that the New Zealand Winegrowers had been told off by the Commerce Commission for telling its members to limit the amount of grapes they harvested.
The commission investigated after receiving three complaints about New Zealand Winegrowers’ conduct during the 2010 harvest.

Apparently the Commission were concerned that the industry group had gone beyond making recommendations about volumes of grapes that were to be harvested and that they had effectively directed growers to harvest only set amounts.

It turns out that this would have been illegal and the Commerce Commission were therefore concerned. They went so far as to issue compliance advice to the New Zealand Winegrowers, which some assumed to be an indication that they had been guilty. However, New Zealand Winegrowers chairman Stuart Smith said he believed the commission’s statement cleared the group of any wrongdoing.

Additionally, Belly Gully (eminent Lawyers that act for the New Zealand Winegrowers) Proudly report on their web site that they have “Acted for New Zealand Winegrowers in relation to the Commerce Commission's investigation into the conduct of New Zealand Winegrowers, as the industry body, regarding grape harvest and wine production levels. The Commission concluded there was no breach.”

This seemed like a bit of an incongruous thing to do. One side (the Commission) says “Bad Winegrowers. Don’t tell growers what to produce.” and then the other side (Winegrowers) says “Good news! The Commission have cleared us of any wrongdoing”.

I for one was confused.

It got better.

15 July 2010:

It was released in the press that The Commerce Commission is offering an amnesty for wine growers (the people who ACTUALLY grow grapes) who own up to colluding over grape prices and harvest yields.

The commission sent New Zealand Winegrowers a letter after an investigation into complaints about the way the group advised members to restrict harvests to meet production targets for the 2010 vintage.

The commission noted it did not have evidence that individual members of New Zealand Winegrowers were setting prices or targets independently of the organisation, but offered immunity from prosecution to the first person to come forward and reveal examples of it happening.

At this point it looks like the Commerce Commission were dredging up a case of sour grapes (everyone loves a pun). I mean what’s going on with the Commerce Commission? Accuse a National body of an illegal act and then offer amnesty for any growers that come forward to confirm it? Frankly it smelled like a fishing trip.

Like any good tale there’s a twist.

Fade back in time……..

5 October 2009:

It was reported in the NZ Herald that “New Zealand Winegrowers has for the first time told wine producers how much fruit to harvest, in an effort to address the oversupply problem. Growers have been told they should harvest no more than 8 tonnes a hectare in the 2010 season. This compares with about 10 tonnes a hectare in the past couple of years.”

The article reports several facets of the reasons why this seemed like a good idea. But I’m pretty sure that the headline for the article sums it up succinctly;

“Winegrowers body sets harvest limits”

So here’s the corrected timeline;

October 2009: NZ Winegrowers appears to direct growers to limit their harvest.

July 2010: NZ Commerce Commission reports that NZ Winegrowers have breached some legal point by telling the growers to harvest a set amount.

July 2010: NZ Winegrowers claim that there was no limit imposed and that (in the words of Stuart Smith) “I do not know why complaints had been made to the commission about the association. Growers had come to the association for guidance after the 2008 harvest created an over-supply of grapes which had damaged the market”

DANGER SPIN ALERT!!

We didn’t tell the growers how much to harvest (like was reported in the press). We just gave them advice when they came to us with a problem.

I think that the smell that the Commerce Commission has picked up is not so much a delicate bouquet that tickles the nose, but a ripe, festering pong that assaults the senses

Apologies to Al Nisbet and The Press

All hail Al Nisbet. I couldn't find the original on-line, but came across the attached perversion of his brilliant original that appeared in The Press a week or so ago dealing with wind farms.

NZ Winegrowers Heads to Court (In the Hurunui and Marlborough)

As reported in the Christchurch press and in rumors coming out of Marlborough. The NZ Winegrowers are appealing decisions to amend noise levels from frost fans to reasonable levels and are heading to the Environment Court to try their luck.
So apart from being told by countless sleep deprived homeowners, apart from being told by acoustic experts, apart from being told by the local Councils, apart from the wine economy dragging respectable (wine-growing) businesses into the mire, they still think that they can make as much noise as they want whenever they want.
They would far rather spend more of the money that they have leached from the growers or have been handed from the government.
Who wins?
Administrators
Lawyers
Red tape connoisseurs
NZ Winegrowers (not NZ wine)

[Late edit]: It would appear that NZ Winegrowers will be appealing the Tasman District Council frost fan rules as well (why should they miss out).

Golden Hills. Excessive Noise.

Jeff Marr has had an opportunity to defend the use of frost fans on his Golden Hills Estates vineyard in Nelson and has put forward an extremely compelling and thought provoking argument.
As reported in the Nelson Mail and featured here, Jeff has once again raise the bar on making sure that the community he so proudly calls his own is cared for and nurtured. 
Quotes attributed to his golden tongue include...
"My neighbors hate my machines. I've no doubt about that at all, and it's inevitable"
"I use helicopters as well, and those neighbours hate them more. They're a lot noisier, and fly right over their house."
"We don't do this to annoy people – it's a necessity."
"If people choose to live here, they have to put up with it."
"If you don't like living in the country, f... off into town"
Ahh... Jeff.
Poster child for the responsible grape grower. How fondly I remember you from 2008.
Although, technically those rat-bag people who complain about the noise aren't Jeff's neighbors. He doesn't actually live on the property (who'd want to with those fans going). He lives about 4km away from that particular block. Closer to the other block that is over by the landfill.
I notice you're still running the old style Defenders (x3) on one block. How are they performing? Noisy? Must be quieter than the two Orchard Rites on the other place. 

Painless Frost Protection

Just thought it would be a good opportunity to update the blog with information on the progress of the Raytheon sponsored microwave frost protection system Tempwave.
It would appear that they have been running trials in an Ontario vineyard over the Northern Winter.
Follow the links for updated information and new pictures.
http://www.raytheon.com/newsroom/technology/rtn09_tmpwv/index.html
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/06/25/raytheon-turns-swords-into-plowshares/
http://www.winesandvines.com/template.cfm?section=news&content=73695
  

A new Hope?

Lester Hope, you're my hero.
Actually, I don't know if you are or not, but I'm willing to take a small punt that you know what you're doing.
Great to see the article on you in the Marlborough Express and to see the effort you've put into developing a frost fan blade.
Lester, I'm no expert, but I've had an opportunity to take note of a frost fan blade or two in my time, and I think you're on the right track. From the small picture in the paper, it is obvious that you understand something that some other manufacturers have missed. Aerodynamics matter.
Your design and that of the Frost Boss C-49 display an understanding of the principle that a frost fan blade is designed to operate at a specific speed and the airflow at that speed has specific properties.
This is where the older traditional fans with their essentially flat blades were pretty crude. The Defender with its aerofoil shape recognized that aerodynamics plays a part, but they failed to pick up the importance of the change in velocity along the length of the blade.
You clearly know what you are doing and I applaud you. Well done.
If you haven't done so yet, please get some acoustic testing carried out and if it's worth crowing about, let us know.
Good on you.

Frost Fan Plan Changes Here

As indicated, the MDC released the Decision on the Plan Changes for Frost Fans today.
You can download your own copy from here.
I can see some good and some bad, some stupid and some really good.
The 100m rule is gone and replaced by a 300m or 55dBA Leq rule. At last some common sense after years of suffering over some idiots mistake when drafting a plan rule. However, there's some muddying of the waters with regards what areas have a 300m and which a 500m setback.
No cumulative effects taken into account. There's a lot of talk about why it wasn't included, and I suppose you can see a reasonable view-point there. However, the faith that is required to be put into the hands of the MDC to now make some sort of monitoring effort to consider the cumulative effects would seem a little misplaced.
The penalty for presence of special audible characteristics is reinforced as being in place.
The MDC are told that monitoring the noise from these things isn't really an optional activity. They are really OBLIGED to do it under the RMA.
There's a lot of twoddle in the report about making sure the frost fan blades don't exceed the speed of sound. They even say that Malcolm Maclean has stated that he has measured fans exceeding this speed. Well I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that isn't likely. Not only that, but a quick check over Malcolm's measurements  (published here), indicates that he's measured them exceeding a compliant speed, but not the speed of sound. (You may want to reply to this Malcolm)

However, the Biggie...
If you haven't demonstrated that your fan was compliant under the old rules and gone and gotten a certificate of compliance under section 139, then you might just be stiff out of luck.
To quote the Environment Court;

The onus is clearly on a person who relies on permitted activities status in the Plan to demonstrate that their activity is compliant

If you want to carry out a permitted activity and to subsequently be afforded the protection inherent therin, you need to have demonstrated compliance.
No demo, no permitted activity.
Jeez, that's about as much fun as a Katipo down the Y fronts.
If your resource management consultant looked after you properly, you'll have a certificate of compliance for your fans. If he or she cut corners, you could be made to SHOCK, HORROR, actually abide by a reasonable level of noise from your currently installed fans.
Wouldn't that be a shame.

Frost Fan Plan Change Released

It has come to my attention that the decision of the hearing for the frost fan plan changes has been released this afternoon.

I would expect that if you put in a submission that you can expect something in the mail in a day or two.

I anticipate change that will make inconsiderate operators squeal, and the barn door will be set ajar. The horses are of course long gone...

Why are consent fees rising?

Yes they went up. Quite a bit according to this article in the Marlborough Express.
So I suppose the Chairman of the New Zealand Winegrowers had good reason to wonder what was going on.
Now I don't know a lot about what makes a Council tick financially. But I do know that in order to properly monitor the rules and regulations of a District plan it will cost a bit of money.
So I suppose you would ask yourself just what are they monitoring and how are the Council maintaining compliance and who are breaking the rules?
Well good questions and good news. Because for a little taste of the evil doings that are going on around the District, the MDC released excerpts from "Environment Action 2008" last year.
Let's have a look....
Prosecution action:
Highfield Terrace Downs Limited for Unauthorised works in a wetland.
Infringement Notices:
Wither Hills Vineyards Marlborough Limited for Discharge of winery wastewater
Foxes Island Wines Limited for Discharge of grapes and wash water to the stormwater system which enters the Co-op Drain.
Spy Valley Wines for Discharge of winery wastewater to land.
Gareth Lynn for Discharge of RDV to wastewater system which enters the Co-op Drain.
Indevin Limited for Discharge of RDV to wastewater system which enters the Co-op Drain.
Robyn Tiller for Discharge to air from burning plastic and treated wood.
Michael Tiller for Discharge to air from burning plastic and treated wood.
Isabel Estate Limited for Discharge to air from burning plastic and treated wood.
Ashmore Vineyards Limited for Discharge of smoke from burning green vegetation.
Lynford Vineyards Limited for Unauthorised filling of a waterway.
Bronwyn Grant for Discharge of smoke from burning plastic vine guards.
Weta Estate Limited for Discharge of smoke to air by burning green vegetation.
Boundary Bay Vineyards Limited for Removal of trees from floodway.
Vines Development Company for Discharge of stormwater from earthworks without sediment traps.
McKean Estates Limited for Disturbing bed of a river.
McKean Estates Limited for Diverting water.
McKean Estates Limited for Tree removal in a riverbed.
McKean Estates Limited for Discharge of sediment from earthworks without sediment traps.
Matakana Estate for Discharge of smoke to air from burning green vegetation.
Weta Estates Limited for Discharge of smoke to air from burning green vegetation.
Saint Claire Estate Wines Limited for Discharge of smoke to air from burning treated timber and plastic.
Odyssey Vineyards Limited for Discharge of smoke to air from burning treated timber and plastic.
Delegats Wine Estate for Discharge of smoke from burning green vegetation.
Abatement Notices:
Alistair Shave for The take and use of water to irrigate a vineyard
Indevin Limited for Discharge of contaminates to a waterway, via the stormwater system.
Wither Hills Vineyards Limited for Discharge of winery wastewater to land in excess of 10mm/day.
Indevin Limited for Discharge of winery wastewater to a waterway via the Council stormwater system.
Indevin Limited for Dumping of grape marc to land.
Richard Campbell for Dumping of grape marc to land
Wairau River Wines Limited for Discharge of winery wastewater to land in excess of 10 mm/day
Anthony Moore for Discharge of grape marc to land
Boundary Bay Vineyards for Removal of trees in floodway
Weta Estates Limited for Burning of unauthorised materials.
Matakana Estate Limited for Unauthorised excavation and vegetation removal in a floodway
Matakana Estate Limited for Burning of unauthorised materials.
M & M Wairau Investments Limited for Taking of water for irrigation of vineyard.
Daniel Watson for Taking of water for irrigation of vineyard
Weta Estates Limited for Taking of water for irrigation of vineyard
Vines Development Company Limited for Taking of water for irrigation of vineyard.
McKean Estate Marlborough Limited for Taking water.

So I suppose the cost of monitoring and enforcing compliance has to cover the efforts of chasing the offenders mentioned above?
So I agree with the New Zealand Winegrowers. The fees have gone up a lot.
But I can sort of see why...

Fourth night in a row for fans.

Fourth times the charm?
Not as many running last night. Quite a bit of on again, off again noise.
No wine can taste that good.

3rd night in a row. Whew!

Feeling really good now.
3 nights in a row with fans operating. A good nights sleep is only a hazy semi-hallucinatory memory.
But I am only one person. Around the district there are hundreds like me. Semi awake, but driving on the roads anyway.
Great.

Frost Fan debate: The age of reason?

I like the idea of the debate page in the Marlborough Express.
So I suppose it would have only been a matter of time before frost fans featured.
Young Malcolm took the 'reason' slant. And why not? It's kind of obvious when you boil the issue down. Frost fan operators should be just as responsible for producing a reasonable of noise as defined in the RMA as any other industry. Why should they be special? Perhaps the Chairman of the New Zealand Winegrowers has a reason? Let's take a look....
There is apparently a significant cost in running a frost machine. Frankly a few hundreds of dollars of diesel is pittance beside the potential earnings of the crop, so let's not mince words here. An operator will ALWAYS err on the side of caution when deciding whether or not to operate his fans. Some operators won't even take as much care as young Stuart. I mean why bother to wake up at 3am when you can simply tell your vineyard manager to turn them on at the first sniff of cool weather and turn them off at sunrise. Small price to pay (especially when you live in another part of the country).
Clearly every time he ran his machines he was faced with no other alternative. This is WAR! (have you noticed how the effort is described as frost fighting? This is genuinely how some growers approach the business of frost protection, no matter what technique is used. And as we know, in war, not everyone's following the Geneva convention (I mean history is written by winners isn't it?)).
I see that "landowners have a responsibility to ensure that the adverse effects of their viticultural practices are mitigated as far as practically possible" So there are adverse effects of viticultural practices, but if you've chosen to grow your crop in an unsuitable area, never fear, you only have to make an effort to mitigate adverse effects, not actually mitigate them.
All the hot air over national standards and complicated rules hides the fact that the New Zealand Winegrowers have not made any practical attempt to limit noise pollution. This includes their code of practice which doesn't even pretend to be enforceable. What Stuart is really saying is let's forget about this petty local squabbling and elevate the issue to a national level so that no affected individual will be inclined to participate and we can either write our own rules or simply drag the process out for longer.
Other Councils are less combative?  How much less combative can they get. For crying out loud, they don't even monitor the noise, just the complaints!!

2nd night of fans. You've got to love it.

So, second night of bing kept awake by fan noise. Lets hope I'm not the person operating the truck on the road that goes past you. Let's hope I'm not the person dispensing your medicines. Lets hope I'm not putting a filling in your child's mouth. Lets hope I'm not flying an airplane. Let's hope I'm not your accountant. Let's hope I'm not your lawyer. Lets hope I'm not your doctor. Let's hope I'm not trying to fix the XT network. Let's hope I'm not a fireman. Let's hope I'm not a police officer. Let's hope I'm not driving your kids to school.
Lets hope I'm not one of the myriad of people who need a good nights sleep to do their job well.
Because that's the second night in a row.

Frost Fan Hearing Tidbits

A recent article in the Marlborough Sun newspaper, has shone a bit of light on some interesting aspects from the recent frost fan plan change hearing.
Actually there are some curious observations.
Complaints have increased as the number of fans has increased (that kind of makes sense).
Why Murray Hunt would be telling the world that the blades on the Defender frost fans were coming apart is a little beyond me, but he's a lawyer, so I presume that it's pretty much public knowledge (or at least Murray thought it was).
Could the Council end up ignoring cumulative effects in the plan change? Frankly that would be ludicrous. To pretend that the noise problem from frost fans is only due to single fans flies in the face of reason.
Is that right? A vineyard owner and an affected resident are both annoyed that a noise report has dodgy data in it? That would be worth seeing (still waiting for those documents).
And of course Councillor Hope appearing for the NZ Winegrowers. A Councillor representing a company with a vested interest in the outcome of the hearing appearing before the committee who are deciding on a district plan. I suppose this would mean he will need to declare a conflict of interest if the plan change has to be voted on.

Fans have a bit of a crack

No, not an actual crack. Just trying to get a way of saying that there were a few fans running last night (not that I can see a frost).
You've got to think that some operators must feel that if they have a fan, they should run it. Irrespective of whether there is a serious risk of frost or not. Plonkers.

Can the Council clean up after itself?

Well, judging by the article in last weeks "The Sun" newspaper - No.

In spite of being subjected to excessive noise by a Council rule that allowed multiple frost fans to be placed within spitting distance of their house, a couple up the Wairau valley have had much in the way of promises and little in the way of substance delivered.
You have to start asking yourself. "Could this be a case of  there but for the grace of God go I?"
The Council have stuffed up here by allowing a blatantly stupid rule to torment average residents. Where does their responsibility lie?
You know, I'd like to know if anyone ever takes responsibility for that 100m rule debacle.