Major electricity pylon route planned for Carlow

almighty1

Morf wrote: »

Nice to see the Nationalist covered the story in a objective way.

I didn't see it, could you elaborate?

Morf

almighty1 wrote: »

I didn't see it, could you elaborate?

Quotes from the group against it with no lack of hyperbole on their part and not a word about why the project is being planned, the benefits of it etc..

I'm used to their frontpage headlines but only giving one side of the story in their coverage of the story is pretty poor journalism by any standard.

almighty1

Morf wrote: »

Quotes from the group against it with no lack of hyperbole on their part and not a word about why the project is being planned, the benefits of it etc..

Whats benefits will this project serve for Carlow?

DieselPowered

almighty1 wrote: »

Whats benefits will this project serve for Carlow?

Pass through tourist attraction

ptogher14

Anybody that objects to this should automatically be disconnected from the national grid. You want the utilities but don't want any of the downfalls that go with.

road_high

almighty1 wrote: »

Whats benefits will this project serve for Carlow?

I'd imagine being connected to a strong power supply would be an attraction for any industry.

almighty1

ptogher14 wrote: »

Anybody that objects to this should automatically be disconnected from the national grid. You want the utilities but don't want any of the downfalls that go with.

Its backward thinking like the above that make me lose faith in our educational system.

Stick a pylon in your back yard and see how you would like it. There are two ways to skin a cat, it doesn't have to be a pylon.

almighty1

road_high wrote: »

I'd imagine being connected to a strong power supply would be an attraction for any industry.

Read previous. At what cost?

And what about the negatives associated with using pylons specifically

Health hazards
Impact on tourism
Impact on high visual amenity areas
Impact on wildlife

dm1979

I could be wrong, but is this not been done to supply power to UK and France, yes it would be more expensive to run cables under ground and if this power is to service another country and not the people who will suffer from having overhead cables near their homes is that not putting profit before people, they could run the cables underground if they wanted to the money made from the electricity sold abroad would pay for it in the end

lucylu

ptogher14 wrote: »

Anybody that objects to this should automatically be disconnected from the national grid. You want the utilities but don't want any of the downfalls that go with.

This will service the growing Dublin Population...
Why should power generated in Cork,traverse the countryside crossing Waterford, Kilkenny, Carlow, Kildare and Wicklow to keep Dublin in Power?
Dublin has the Irish Sea why don't they put the windfarms off the Dalkey coast... let me see too many big bucks and objections..

fits

ptogher14 wrote: »

Anybody that objects to this should automatically be disconnected from the national grid. You want the utilities but don't want any of the downfalls that go with.

I agree there is a need for good power infrastructure, however there is no need to cover every square inch of this country with infrastructure. Special areas should be recognized and protected.

fits

Morf wrote: »

Does mains electricity serve Carlow? Would industry seeking better electrical infrastructure to locate in Carlow providing jobs serve Carlow?

Then take those two points and apply those to 25 other counties.

You cant just plug into a 400 kV line. It needs to go through sub stations. One substation is in Kilcullen, the other Great Island and any power for Carlow will come from one of these.

Morf

Long story short:

Group A: Not in my back yard, do it "somewhere else" "in a different more expensive and unsuitable way" "not at all"

Group B "It is necessary and has to go somewhere" "there is a group benefit"

Apply to prisons, dumps, shell gas terminals and so on.

fits

Morf wrote: »

If I were to take a good look around these areas of South Carlow and point out all the unsuitable one-off housing that blots the landscape would it be equally sympathetic to these "special" areas to suggest they be flattened and returned to their previous unspoilt state?

Recognising the landscape and cultural value of an area does not mean that the landscape is frozen in position or that there is no development, and it certainly does not mean that one off housing would be prevented.

Are you really equating a 7 metre high house with a 43 metre high pylon in terms of impact on landscape?

fits

Morf wrote: »

Long story short:

Group A: Not in my back yard, do it "somewhere else" "in a different more expensive and unsuitable way" "not at all"

Group B "It is necessary and has to go somewhere" "there is a group benefit"

Apply to prisons, dumps, shell gas terminals and so on.

Group C Yes they are necessary but should be located appropriately. Dumps, prisons, shell gas terminals should not be sited on top of Croagh Patrick, for example....

Morf

fits wrote: »

Recognising the landscape and cultural value of an area does not mean that the landscape is frozen in position or that there is no development, and it certainly does not mean that one off housing would be prevented.

Are you really equating a 7 metre high house with a 43 metre high pylon in terms of impact on landscape?

I deleted this and the other as the post I did leave did covered my opinion relatively well rather than pointing out quite a few misconceptions and fallacies being made out in this thread.

I'm not necessarily a supporter of this scheme but the attitude as I attributed to Group A is all too common and Group B's approach is often countered with fallacies, hyperbole and misdirection.

Your second point is particularly silly. Quite a lot of people would consider houses dotted across an area of scenic value devaluing. Quite a lot of people with off houses in these scenic areas are advocating similar aethetic negatives to electricity pylons. The Nationalist article criticised Carlow Co. Co. planning for a lack of a safeguard to this area when ironically poor long term planning in these areas allow so many of these people to have houses there.

Morf

fits wrote: »

Group C Yes they are necessary but should be located appropriately. Dumps, prisons, shell gas terminals should not be sited on top of Croagh Patrick, for example....

That's covered in group B. Group B (in my experience) don't advocate that these be located in areas to cause most disquiet. There are usually reports and viability studies done and they recommend a certain site/area. Group A disregard said studies/reports and return to the the views which I covered earlier.

These aren't all-encompassing. I'm wildly stereotyping but it seems to cover the situation here and in Ireland that I've seen quite well.

Morf

Why do I find myself dragged into these things?

A) Nationalist has a poor level of journalism.

This project has a benefit. The negative out-weighs the positive if you are near/within sight of a pylon. It still has a benefit for far more people.

C)

D) Profit.

fits

Morf wrote: »

T There are usually reports and viability studies done and they recommend a certain site/area. .

Indeed. Eirgrid put a lot of work into generating a constraints map, or a heat map. This contains all sorts of layers with information about heritage, special areas of conservation, natural parks and high amenity areas.

For the latter, they consult each county's County development plan.

But guess what. There are no high amenity areas in Carlow after this debacle in 2002 http://www.independent.ie/regionals/carlowpeople/news/councillors-green-light-a-county-plan-without-high-amenity-areas-27004091.html

When Eirgrid contacted the council for more information one person in the executive responded unilaterally, (without consulting anyone) and told them to come on up through Carlow no bother. This same council is also being investigated for planning irregularities.

As a result of this, south county carlow, between the Blackstairs and the Barrow (and high amenity area of co. kilkenny) was identified as unconstrained.

Just someone is opposing a major infrastructure project does not mean they do not have a case. And preserving beautiful landscape is also for the public good.

Morf

I didn't say they didn't have a case.

My second post pointed out the bias in the Nationalist coverage. It was suggested by Almighty1 that there wasn't a "benefit" at all from this project for the Nationalist to mention in the story.

Then it proceeded to parochial attitudes.

I'm out anyway. Don't have the will for arguing with zealots.

almighty1

Morf wrote: »

I didn't say they didn't have a case.

My second post pointed out the bias in the Nationalist coverage. It was suggested by Almighty1 that there wasn't a "benefit" at all from this project for the Nationalist to mention in the story.

Then it proceeded to parochial attitudes.

I'm out anyway. Don't have the will for arguing with zealots.

Just because somebody opposes a 46m high pylon being placed close to their house makes them a zealot? Do people not have the right to oppose such things based on health, wealth and happiness?

Morf there are many disadvantages to this pylon route for everybody in Carlow not just the people who live close to them. I'm sure you've enjoyed the great scenery around Mt Leinster and Borris. Don't you think this pylon route will spoil it? Don't you think that it will affect the visual amenity and subsequent tourism of this area?

Do you repeal all ground for a public protest? If so, then please please answer these questions.

• Would you appeal if a dump was built right beside your house? After all the people of Carlow need to get rid of their waste somewhere and it would be of the greater benefit to Carlow?
• Would you appeal if a new motorway was run right beside your house. After all the people of Carlow need to get to location X faster. It would be to the great benefit to Carlow people.

Sure sit back and accept it. It'll be grand. :rolleyes:

Morf

almighty1 wrote: »

Just because somebody opposes a 46m high pylon being placed close to their house makes them a zealot? Do people not have the right to oppose such things based on health, wealth and happiness?

Morf there are many disadvantages to this pylon route for everybody in Carlow not just the people who live close to them. I'm sure you've enjoyed the great scenery around Mt Leinster and Borris. Don't you think this pylon route will spoil it? Don't you think that it will affect the visual amenity and subsequent tourism of this area?

Do you repeal all ground for a public protest? If so, then please please answer these questions.

• Would you appeal if a dump was built right beside your house? After all the people of Carlow need to get rid of their waste somewhere and it would be of the greater benefit to Carlow?
• Would you appeal if a new motorway was run right beside your house. After all the people of Carlow need to get to location X faster. It would be to the great benefit to Carlow people.

Sure sit back and accept it. It'll be grand. :rolleyes:

You haven't actually given me any other argument that I haven't already covered. You're just being more condescending about it.

You choose to live in the countryside.

Therefore your amenities are worse and there are the possibilities of motorways/dumps/powerlines/other will go near your dwelling.

Getting upset because you can't have it every way you want it and refusing to acknowledge that these things benefit more people than they disadvantage is pretty one-eyed really.

Cienciano

almighty1 wrote: »

Read previous. At what cost?

And what about the negatives associated with using pylons specifically

Health hazards
Impact on tourism
Impact on high visual amenity areas
Impact on wildlife

You mentioned "tourism" as something that will be negatively affected. Can you elaborate a bit?

almighty1

Morf wrote: »

You haven't actually given me any other argument that I haven't already covered. You're just being more condescending about it.

You choose to live in the countryside.

Therefore your amenities are worse and there are the possibilities of motorways/dumps/powerlines/other will go near your dwelling.

Getting upset because you can't have it every way you want it and refusing to acknowledge that these things benefit more people than they disadvantage is pretty one-eyed really.

You haven't actually answered any of my questions.

You are presuming all the people who oppose these pylons are all zealots.
You are saying that people who chose to live in the countryside have no grounds for appeal or protest.
By that presumption you are saying that if Eirgrid chose to run a pylon route directly through Carlow town then those people would have more grounds for protesting?

That is about as one-eyed as you get Morf.

Can you even admit that these will be a blot on the landscape?
Can you comprehend the potential health implications of living close to one of these?
Do you think that alternative routes (underground or undersea) should be investigated a bit further?

So could you please answer the questions above (clue - they are followed by a question mark)

almighty1

Cienciano wrote: »

You mentioned "tourism" as something that will be negatively affected. Can you elaborate a bit?

Mount Leinster foothills - Borris Viaduct - St Mullins scenery. All major tourist attractions in South Carlow. All within a pylon route. I don't need to spell it out.


Mod.
Image deleted.
Reason: Too big.

Carlos Orange

almighty1 wrote: »

Perhaps they don't have the money to pay outright for it and are willing to take the hit over a longer term. Time involved may be an issue also. I'm presuming overground is quicker.

Either way they are a blight on our landscape. Destroying the country with horrible poles, wires and pylons. Do you agree?

I think electricity is a blight on the countryside. It ruins my view of the stars.

Carlos Orange

almighty1 wrote: »

Mount Leinster foothills - Borris Viaduct - St Mullins scenery. All major tourist attractions in South Carlow. All within a pylon route. I don't need to spell it out.

How many thousands of tourists a year visit?
BTW, I see the middle picture is already ruined by infrastructure development.

almighty1

psinno wrote: »

How many thousands of tourists a year visit?
BTW, I see the middle picture is already ruined by infrastructure development.

A lot more than if you stick horrible pylons in the way.

Could you explain what you mean by the infrastructure development in the middle picture? If you mean the house then that is a listed building that has recently been restored. Jesus those planning regulations were really lax in the 1800s.

fits

Morf wrote: »

You haven't actually given me any other argument that I haven't already covered. You're just being more condescending about it.

You choose to live in the countryside.

Therefore your amenities are worse and there are the possibilities of motorways/dumps/powerlines/other will go near your dwelling.

Getting upset because you can't have it every way you want it and refusing to acknowledge that these things benefit more people than they disadvantage is pretty one-eyed really.

A: People are getting what's coming to them by choosing to live in the countryside.

B: South Carlow is of no particular merit and running a high voltage route within 1 km of the historic town of Borris and the beautiful landscape at the foothills of Mount Leinster is grand.

That's what you're saying right? Theres nothing objectionable about this. Its not in the public interest to preserve that landscape.

Cienciano

almighty1 wrote: »

Mount Leinster foothills - Borris Viaduct - St Mullins scenery. All major tourist attractions in South Carlow. All within a pylon route. I don't need to spell it out.

Out of interest, how many people visit the Borris Viaduct each year? How much would this drop if there's pylons in the area? You do need to spell it out! I'm genuinely interested to hear how Carlows tourist industry will be effected. I've never decided to not go somewhere because powerlines are in the area.