Very rural Ireland

murphaph

busman wrote: »

Couldn't be bothered to check, you can keep your underground, I'll keep my horse :cool:

This message brought to you from beyond the pail

The funny thing is, when a city is developed properly, its inhabitants can also avail of such facilities. My GF goes riding here in Berlin a couple of times a week. A horse share is quite common here. If you want to own one outright, you can do so at reasonable cost without having to build a one off house in a previously scenic area.

So, in Berlin we have an underground AND access to horses and other "rural" activities. It can be done, if the will is there.

John_Rambo

thebman wrote: »

Dublin is more like LA than a European city

I can't believe how out of kilter some people are with their one capital.

I think it's time we realised that the celtic tiger is over. McMansions with eight bathrooms and two garages dotted here and there should be a thing of the past. Close knit communities need to be rebuilt, local businesses need to be supported, local produce needs to be utilised, kids should be able to play with neighbours, they should be able to walk to school and to the shops. I know people who have never walked more than 300 metres from their house, it's no wonder the country has an obesity problem. They have to get in to their car to go anywhere. Pubs are isolated and new laws haven't helped, suicide is rife. I get more fresh air than most of my rural friends and family and I live on the coast four klicks from Dublin city centre.

It's time to get back to grass roots. Back to united communities.

Computer Sci

murphaph wrote: »

The funny thing is, when a city is developed properly, its inhabitants can also avail of such facilities. My GF goes riding here in Berlin a couple of times a week. A horse share is quite common here. If you want to own one outright, you can do so at reasonable cost without having to build a one off house in a previously scenic area.

So, in Berlin we have an underground AND access to horses and other "rural" activities. It can be done, if the will is there.

What needs to be carefully pointed out is that much of the countryside, like that of most parts of the planet is in no way spectacular. Indeed without the trees and enclosures, the Irish countryside would be a much duller place. And again what's important to remember is that through the intervention of agriculture, and hence human involvement that we have the countryside we have today. So in that sense, much of it is the legacy of agricultural intervention. Much of the flatlands would not have so many redeeming features left in their natural state.

Indeed much of the French countryside, in large part thanks to the remembrement movement is effectively in it's natural state - if deforested in large part. This has lead to not only lesser populated areas, but largely bland and featureless monoculture landscapes. This is not so in Ireland, where there has been a continuation of a rural living population - unlike other parts of Europe, where the countryside's are effectively depopulated whether due to industrialisation or planning codes.

So, what you may consider natural is in effect the result of human intervention, whether through settlement or agriculture. A lot of people tend to forget that large areas of wilderness left in their original state are far from scenic, and if anything are depressing and dull.

As for the comparative analysis between Berlin and Dublin – I am positive that it would have more to do with local interest in Berlin, as opposed to lack of interest in Dublin. If such facilities were in demand by the people of Dublin, I’m sure they would be provided for – perhaps in a large area like the Phoenix Park.

Computer Sci

John_Rambo wrote: »

I can't believe how out of kilter some people are with their one capital.

I think it's time we realised that the celtic tiger is over. McMansions with eight bathrooms and two garages dotted here and there should be a thing of the past. Close knit communities need to be rebuilt, local businesses need to be supported, local produce needs to be utilised, kids should be able to play with neighbours, they should be able to walk to school and to the shops. I know people who have never walked more than 300 metres from their house, it's no wonder the country has an obesity problem. They have to get in to their car to go anywhere. Pubs are isolated and new laws haven't helped, suicide is rife. I get more fresh air than most of my rural friends and family and I live on the coast four klicks from Dublin city centre.

It's time to get back to grass roots. Back to united communities.

As somebody who lives on the outskirts of Dublin and in relative proximity to it, I think you are exaggerating Dublin’s attractiveness a little bit. In comparison to cities elsewhere, and in particular capital cities such as London, Paris, Rome, Washington etc. much of Dublin is run down, shoddy and not very well looked after. Indeed, the general disregard shown by many Dubliners for the city is nothing short of a disgrace whether it is through littering, or other vulgar and obscene carry on.

If you actually go slightly off-route from areas such as O’ Connell Street and Temple Bar, down some of the streets, and in particular down some of the back alleys – you will find run down areas befitting the slums of the third world. These areas are havens for drug addicts and all sorts of crime. Temple Bar, although a noble venture in the beginning is nothing short of an abomination given some of the carry on there throughout the early hours of the morning in particular. Not to mention that rubbing shoulders with some of the cities prominent streets you will find dangerous housing projects and council housing, which effectively cuts off the city from visitors, commerce etc.

I have been to many cities and capital cities, and for the most parts they are well-policed, well-maintained and pleasant environments in which to be in. Although Dublin certainly does have it’s interesting areas, I find this arrogance amongst Dubliners, that Dublin is some great cultural and global hotspot to be a nonsense because that is not how I see it when I go into it on occasions. If anything, I have never seen a people are as anti-social and disregarding of their streets and neighbourhoods as many Dubliners – not all of course, but enough to make large parts of the city a disgrace, given that it is purportedly our national capital.

John_Rambo

A bit off topic, but if you think Paris and Rome are safer, cleaner places than Dublin you're seriously deluded. I don't understand your irrational attack on Dublin or what it has to do with this thread, all I said was I get fresh air and that I live in Dublin.

Computer Sci

Computer Sci wrote: »

As somebody who lives on the outskirts of Dublin and in relative proximity to it, I think you are exaggerating Dublin’s attractiveness a little bit. In comparison to cities elsewhere, and in particular capital cities such as London, Paris, Rome, Washington etc. much of Dublin is run down, shoddy and not very well looked after. Indeed, the general disregard shown by many Dubliners for the city is nothing short of a disgrace whether it is through littering, or other vulgar and obscene carry on.

If you actually go slightly off-route from areas such as O’ Connell Street and Temple Bar, down some of the streets, and in particular down some of the back alleys – you will find run down areas befitting the slums of the third world. These areas are havens for drug addicts and all sorts of crime. Temple Bar, although a noble venture in the beginning is nothing short of an abomination given some of the carry on there throughout the early hours of the morning in particular. Not to mention that rubbing shoulders with some of the cities prominent streets you will find dangerous housing projects and council housing, which effectively cuts off the city from visitors, commerce etc.

I have been to many cities and capital cities, and for the most parts they are well-policed, well-maintained and pleasant environments in which to be in. Although Dublin certainly does have it’s interesting areas, I find this arrogance amongst Dubliners, that Dublin is some great cultural and global hotspot to be a nonsense because that is not how I see it when I go into it on occasions. If anything, I have never seen a people are as anti-social and disregarding of their streets and neighbourhoods as many Dubliners – not all of course, but enough to make large parts of the city a disgrace, given that it is purportedly our national capital.

Without drifting too much off topic, much of Dublin's problems (and that of most other cities) is simply down to the fact that a now mobile population simply upped sticks and moved into the country. What they left behind was the poorer and less able people who are the cause of many of the social problems seen. Other areas of course became popular and the majority of potential inhabitants were priced out and "forced" to move to the country to find affordable housing.

One of the solutions would be to build more family housing within the city, replacing many of the older and poor quality housing there.

I'm fairly convinced that the trend of building McMansions on isolated sites is now coming to an end and that a significant number are likely to be abandoned after the present owners move/die off.

The era of cheap and plentiful fuel is coming to an end!

busman

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm fairly convinced that the trend of building McMansions on isolated sites is now coming to an end and that a significant number are likely to be abandoned after the present owners move/die off.

Maybe not just yet finished on the one off houses.

"Single-units have accounted for some 80% of all
commencements over the last 12 months and developer activity
appears to have ground to a virtual halt"

Source : http://www.aibeconomicresearch.com/PDFS/Housing%20Market%20Bulletin%20May%202011.pdf

Also just to make it clear that while I'm all for personal choice as to where people what to live, I'm also concerned for sustainable.

My house is a "modest" 1200 sq ft. on approx 4 acres which I have planted ash and willow as a fuel when the cost of oil become uneconomical for me.

I see some of the "McMansions" build around my area and shake my head and ask how the fu@k are they going to heat those in years to come?
And then I say, why do I care?

But I agree with Deleted User that many will be abandoned to the wildlife, just like so many abandoned cottages of past generations.

Tipp Man

murphaph wrote: »

The funny thing is, when a city is developed properly, its inhabitants can also avail of such facilities. My GF goes riding here in Berlin a couple of times a week. A horse share is quite common here. If you want to own one outright, you can do so at reasonable cost without having to build a one off house in a previously scenic area.

So, in Berlin we have an underground AND access to horses and other "rural" activities. It can be done, if the will is there.

you don't have to go as far as Berlin to get horses in a city environment

Try Tallaght, Darndale, Finglas ...........

Aidan1

This is not so in Ireland, where there has been a continuation of a rural living population - unlike other parts of Europe, where the countryside's are effectively depopulated whether due to industrialisation or planning codes.

Thats a bit of a stretch, to be honest. Widely dispersed rural populations, like ours, are quite rare in Northern Europe - in most other countries the pattern has been urban/village focussed for centuries*. Ireland is, in many ways, an outlier due to the large scale dispersal of land to small tenant farmers in the late 18th/early 19th century, followed by a peasant ownership of same after the Land Acts. In other words, a widely dispersed 'rural living' population has only been a characteristic of Ireland since the early 19th century, and it has been in terminal decline since the 1870s (due to an agricultural recession).

More pertinently, the recent (last 20-30 years) growth in rural housing has been very different - it has been urban generated. The vast majority of people living in these houses are employed in an urban location, and commute, by car, to their place of work - there is a vast amount of evidence to support this. There is a real problem here in terms of efficiency - this is a very inefficient settlement pattern for the provision of services, not to mention extremely vulnerable to energy price increases.

*And not just due to industrialisation or agricultural revolution - farm labourers mainly lived in towns across most of Northern Europe for centuries.

*Edit - I see your point about Dublin. While areas of the city are very pleasant, there are very significant parts for which the only solutions involve either a bulldozer or explosives. And there is a serious crime problem that has become invisible to many residents.

KevR

RT&#201 wrote: »

Water pollution clean-up to cost millions

Updated: 09:45, Wednesday, 15 June 2011

The EPA has said millions of euro will have to be spent on improving badly polluted water sources to meet strict EU directives.

Details of the serious levels of pollution in Irish lakes and rivers will be outlined at a conference organised by the Environmental Protection Agency in Galway later today.

The agency says millions of euro will have to be spent on improving badly polluted water sources between now and 2015 to meet strict EU directives.

The latest survey by EPA inspection teams on lakes and rivers across the country has found that 931 are either moderately or badly contaminated.
EPA Programme Manager Gerard O'Leary said much of this comes from agricultural effluent or badly maintained municipal waste water treatment plants.

Ireland is already facing a possible EU fine of €2.7m for its failure to deal with almost 500,000 polluting septic tanks.

Environment Minister Phil Hogan is expected to tell the 300 delegates the Government is fast tracking new legislation to tackle the pollution problem with strong inspection and enforcement powers.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0615/epa.html

I think the EU fine should be passed on to the owners of polluting septic tanks.

KevR

KevR wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0615/epa.html

I think the EU fine should be passed on to the owners of polluting septic tanks.

Well they better be sure not to pass that on to those of us who have approved and maintained systems.

galwayrush

KevR wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0615/epa.html

I think the EU fine should be passed on to the owners of polluting septic tanks.

Got mine looked at, working perfectly, as are most of them in the country i imagine.

corktina

not sure about that.Many are in areas with no soakage. I know my former home falls into that category as did all the neighbours for miles around. .When full, they spill over and eventually vent into a water course.

BrianD

galwayrush wrote: »

Got mine looked at, working perfectly, as are most of them in the country i imagine.

Not true. It's a huge problem in this country particularly with the older systems.

There are some parts of the country where people are drinking their own waste.

popebenny16

there is no doubt that faulty and overflowing tanks are a problem, but overflowing tanks can be cleaned out for as little as €80 - using a proper professional firm. It a question of maintenance and, as has beeen pointed out, being built in a proper area in the first place with proper drainage. I know a several instances where the percolation tests done are not worth a crap (no pun intended) as the council was determined at the time to get as many houses built so they could cream off the development levies.

Added to that I know of farmers who, for a fee, will bring the slurry tank and suck out all your waste and then happily spread it on their own land, which is totally illegal and disgusting as well as enviromentally horrific. Mention it and be called just a ****er from dublin down your local pub - its great!!

Then there is the nitrate problem and "accidental" spills of sluury into rivers. Its more than spetic tanks, you know.

popebenny16

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Have a look at the amount of light from ireland, considering we have the population of the Greater Manchester Area.

It shows where our planning has gotten us, but the question has to be, what do we do from here? We must take the opportuinity we now have with the pause in housing construction to radically shake up the planning laws and take planning away from local authorities and the chance of brown envelope and who you know cronyism. In future, if there is to be any housing built at all given our vast over supply, it must be within existing towns/villages. What can we do with that we have though? We cannot bulldoze existing houses and force people to move into towns.

dubhthach

Is there a national database of location of Septic tanks? I doubt it there is to be honest. Surely best way would be to have a equivalent of NCT for such systems. Eg it gets inspected every 10years or so, if in serious breech then the "polluter pays" etc.

What is the expected lifetime of the average septic tank system anyways?

popebenny16

dubhthach wrote: »

Is there a national database of location of Septic tanks? I doubt it there is to be honest. Surely best way would be to have a equivalent of NCT for such systems. Eg it gets inspected every 10years or so, if in serious breech then the "polluter pays" etc.

What is the expected lifetime of the average septic tank system anyways?

no such database, but you could figure it out by taking away the number of houses connected to a mains sewer from total housing in the state - maybe the CSO has those figures.

I agree with the NCT idea. You are supposed to have your septic de-sludged every few years anyway, or is you have a BnM system like we do you get it cleaned every year or 18th months, we also get the exiting water tested onece a year as well, its not that expensive. An NCT for septics would want to test that as well.

A spetic tank is basically a concrete tub, it can last forever if it is de-sludged regularly. The BnM yoke i have is massive but it is the business and i cannot understand why every planning permission does not come with it as standard.

corktina

in my case and most of my neighbours they werent faulty tanks...brand new ones! In any case it isnt the ****e thats the problem , its the chemicals that would worry me

dubhthach

corktina wrote: »

in my case and most of my neighbours they werent faulty tanks...brand new ones! In any case it isnt the ****e thats the problem , its the chemicals that would worry me

Ye wouldn't say that if ye came down with a dose of Crypto!

corktina

no, i probably would say much at all.....

L1011

popebenny16 wrote: »

no such database, but you could figure it out by taking away the number of houses connected to a mains sewer from total housing in the state - maybe the CSO has those figures.

That'll just give the numbers, which Phil Hogan already has - 475,000 I think he said on radio today


Searching decades of planning files is probably the only way.

Well a good starting point would be to use the databases of septic tank maintainers, we are on a contract with Biocycle, so I'm sure the data is out there.

Subtract those from the list and you will be left with the number of potential polluters.

Tipp Man

Well for starters a proper functioning septic tank should never need to be touched, when you start messing about with the bacteria levels then they stop functioning properly

Secondly THE biggest polluter in this country is the state itself, via its county councils pumping raw sewage into rivers. In my area i can name at least 4 or 5 villages which do not have any sewage treatment plants, 2 of which are very large villages. Our nearest village only got a plant about 3-4 years ago, and that was built by a builder as a condition for building a housing scheme

When the councils get there house in order then let them start doing inspections

dubhthach

Well pollution of surface water is a major issue (rivers, Lakes) However there is also a major Ground water problem going on with faecal coliforms detected in 25.4% of ground water samples taken at 135 monitoring stations around the country. 10.9% of samples exceeded a level of 10/100 ml. This is indicative of "gross contamination". Discharges into surface watercourses wouldn't cause this level of contamination.



As you can see in this map North East Galway is heavily affected this area doesn't have any major watercourses in it other then the Clare (and the upper Suck on the boundary with Roscommon). There was a number of samples in this region where Faecal Coliform count exceed 100/100ml !

What does the light blue on the map indicate?

dubhthach

The light blue area in the above map is an aquifer. In this case the area is limestone and "Karstified (Conduit) " (Burren is a Kars landscape). There's a major issue with seepage in such an area as Rock formation is very porous.

Here's the EPA report
http://www.epa.ie/downloads/pubs/other/indicators/irlenv/43366%20EPA%20report%20chap%206.pdf

Aidan1

In one way thats a very strange map - it's almost a precise inverse of the population density map (Galway notwithstanding) - the most populous parts of the country are amongst the least affected by this (and yes, the hydrogeology is a key determinant also). That alone points to the role of domestic waste water treatment facilities, and leaky, non functioning, septic tanks.

busman

dubhthach wrote: »

Well pollution of surface water is a major issue (rivers, Lakes) However there is also a major Ground water problem going on with faecal coliforms detected in 25.4% of ground water samples taken at 135 monitoring stations around the country. 10.9% of samples exceeded a level of 10/100 ml. This is indicative of "gross contamination". Discharges into surface watercourses wouldn't cause this level of contamination.
!

How much of this can be traced to septic tanks and how much from farming activity?

Aidan1

Busman - won't speak for Dubhthach, but generally you would expect a lot of farming related leaks to find their way into surface water (and thus water courses) rather than groundwater.

Also, it should be noted that there are strict guidelines for farmers around everything from landspreading to storage of slurry, with heavy fines in place that are enforced. There are still, I'm sure, some individuals who cause problems, but it isn't half the issue it used to be.