Major electricity pylon route planned for Carlow

Knob Longman

I see lot's of the nimby's and the anti everything brigade are up in a frenzy about the pylons, Our communities are well able to organise when it comes to opposing things but never organise or care when it comes to demanding better of our politicians or our death trap roads or corruption.

byhookorbycrook

Can we at least keep the text black on white, please?

madmaggie

Villain wrote: »

I wouldn't be jumping for joy but I would accept it, they have to go in someone's backyard!

From that I take it that your property is not affected by one of these proposed routes. I am affected by it, and I am a 'nimby', not in my yard, field or anywhere else near me or my neighbours. And if that makes me some sort of Luddite redneck, well, you know what, I just don't care. :mad:

SV

It's funny because over all the protesting and complaining..it'll still go ahead as planned

fits

^ Well with the four potential corridors I think there is some scope to influence it until November 26th. Some say the preferred route has already been identified though. Who knows..

fits

Its very easy to dismiss anyone who objects to a plan such as this as a nimby. It is also very convenient for companies like eirgrid as it puts all objectors into the same category, whether they have a case or not. Better to judge each case on its merits rather than falling into lazy categorisations.

almighty1

A meeting was held in Nurney primary school last night with in excess of 150 people at it. Al least two councillors from the local area were present. Lots of things were discussed but the overriding factor was the potential impact on peoples health.

There are only tentative studies in this area but some of the results are alarming

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/13440.php
http://www.bmj.com/content/330/7503/1290

Conclusions There is an association between childhood leukaemia and proximity of home address at birth to high voltage power lines, and the apparent risk extends to a greater distance than would have been expected from previous studies. About 4% of children in England and Wales live within 600 m of high voltage lines at birth. If the association is causal, about 1% of childhood leukaemia in England and Wales would be attributable to these lines, though this estimate has considerable statistical uncertainty. There is no accepted biological mechanism to explain the epidemiological results; indeed, the relation may be due to chance or confounding.

You still would accept them in your back yard Villain?

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/A_demand_for_undergrounding_of_high_voltage_power_lines_in_Ireland/?copy

zl1whqvjs75cdy

" about 1% of childhood leukaemia in England and Wales would be attributable to these lines, though this estimate has considerable statistical uncertainty. There is no accepted biological mechanism to explain the epidemiological results; indeed, the relation may be due to chance or confounding. "

Not exactly stone cold proof there is it.

almighty1

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

" about 1% of childhood leukaemia in England and Wales would be attributable to these lines, though this estimate has considerable statistical uncertainty. There is no accepted biological mechanism to explain the epidemiological results; indeed, the relation may be due to chance or confounding. "

Not exactly stone cold proof there is it.

That's why I said tentative. There is a link though.
What about asbestos and tobacco? Until studies were carried out people thought these were harmless too.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

There's evidence that electricity pylons have no bearing on leukemia rates also,

"With respect to RF electromagnetic fields, two consistent large-scale epidemiological studies based on field strength predictions for each participant provide little evidence for an association between RF electromagnetic fields and childhood leukaemia "

From here; http://rpd.oxfordjournals.org/content/132/2/202.full.pdf+html

So studies have been carried out on its potential harm, this is to address your asbestos and tobacco point.

Edit; That article is also a review article so looks at a body of recent literature on the subject. Its relatively well cited so the science is quite robust.

almighty1

Studies are still in their infancy. You'd wonder that the "studies" performed that found no link may have an ulterior motive. Statistics and such can be massaged to conclude whatever answer is required.

Who knows what things we eat and use nowadays that might be banned in 30 years time.

I'd rather not take any chances.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Ah I see so I provide sound scientific evidence and you decide to not engage with the discussion at all. Excellent.

Edit; Also your attempt to discredit scientific literature by suggesting that the evidence provided has some ulterior motive sounds very much like the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist. If you don't agree with me, fine. But provide evidence, don't just ignore the counter argument that is presented.

Villain

almighty1 wrote: »

A meeting was held in Nurney primary school last night with in excess of 150 people at it. Al least two councillors from the local area were present. Lots of things were discussed but the overriding factor was the potential impact on peoples health.

There are only tentative studies in this area but some of the results are alarming

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/13440.php
http://www.bmj.com/content/330/7503/1290



You still would accept them in your back yard Villain?

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/A_demand_for_undergrounding_of_high_voltage_power_lines_in_Ireland/?copy

Next you will be telling me not to give kids vaccines!

There is no proof that Pylons cause health issues, there are studies that suggest they might and there are studies that suggest they don't but no proof.

I don't have a problem with them, that is my opinion which I am entitled to just as you are entitled to yours.

It's funny how very often people who get involved in these situations can't accept the alternative views.

almighty1

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Ah I see so I provide sound scientific evidence and you decide to not engage with the discussion at all. Excellent.

Edit; Also your attempt to discredit scientific literature by suggesting that the evidence provided has some ulterior motive sounds very much like the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist. If you don't agree with me, fine. But provide evidence, don't just ignore the counter argument that is presented.

I provided evidence also. You chose to ignore. It requires further investigation (which I outlined in my original post) but both yourself and Villian decided to ignore that. There's at least a tentative link between high voltage power lines and leukemia.

Even a tentative link is more than enough reason to oppose these especially if they come so close to ones house.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

I addressed your evidence. The authors of the paper say themselves that the statistics are shaky and the results may be due to chance. That is poles apart from the well cited review paper I provided.

Villain

almighty1 wrote: »

I provided evidence also. You chose to ignore. It requires further investigation (which I outlined in my original post) but both yourself and Villian decided to ignore that. There's at least a tentative link between high voltage power lines and leukemia.

Even a tentative link is more than enough reason to oppose these especially if they come so close to ones house.

I didn't ignore anything??

almighty1

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

I addressed your evidence. The authors of the paper say themselves that the statistics are shaky and the results may be due to chance. That is poles apart from the well cited review paper I provided.

They mention there is no biological reasoning because finding the cause of any biological disease is inherently difficult.

However the facts are there to read

There is an association between childhood leukaemia and proximity of home address at birth to high voltage power lines, and the apparent risk extends to a greater distance than would have been expected from previous studies. About 4% of children in England and Wales live within 600 m of high voltage lines at birth. If the association is causal, about 1% of childhood leukaemia in England and Wales would be attributable to these lines

Another report from the UK national cancer institute said this

To estimate more accurately the risks of leukemia in children from magnetic fields resulting from power lines, researchers pooled (combined) data from many studies. In one pooled study that combined nine well-conducted studies from several countries, including a study from the NCI, a twofold excess risk of childhood leukemia was associated with exposure to magnetic fields above 0.4 µT

zl1whqvjs75cdy

forget this bit?

though this estimate has considerable statistical uncertainty. There is no accepted biological mechanism to explain the epidemiological results; indeed, the relation may be due to chance or confounding.

Evidence with no statistical backing cannot be taken as true. Although I do accept that at least you are providing decent links, rather than the normal rabble,rabble rabble that goes on here.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. I'm clearly not going to change your mind and those publications certainly aren't going to change mine.

fits

I am undecided on the health effects. I think the EMF from a high voltage line is certainly going to be significant and I certainly would not like to live within 23 metres of one.

The EU FP7 (research programme) evidently decided it was worthy of further investigation. Also Ireland is not like many other EU countries. Our rural areas are still well populated and running these lines through rural Ireland just isn't the same as running it through places like Spain and France which have less populated rural areas.

This is from the funding call this year, I don't know if any projects were awarded under it.

"ENV.2013.6.4-2 Closing gaps of knowledge and reducing exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) - FP7-ENV-2013-two-stage. As previous studies have been inconclusive as regards possible health effects of exposure to EMFs, further research should be carried out to better understand the possible mechanisms generating biological effects through the use of novel approaches, as well as to collect and improve exposure and health risk assessment of EMFs, and also to underpin policy development. A large-scale prospective population study - that could reach beyond the EU - could be envisaged to investigate, inter alia, the role of radiofrequency (RF) exposures in cancer risk, neurodegenerative diseases, reproductive problems, behaviour and ageing, and exposure and health effects from intermediate frequency (IF) fields. More data on cumulative personal exposures from various sources should be collected. The research should also propose non technological means to reduce exposure.

Funding scheme: Collaborative Project, The requested EU contribution per project shall not exceed EUR 6 000 000. Up to one proposal can be selected.

Expected impact: Support to EU and national regulatory bodies and policies by improving reliability of research data on potential effects of EMF exposures. Contribution to EU risk assessment and management activities through an improved evaluation of cumulative and integrated personal exposure. Application of novel approaches (e.g. systems biology) to EMF health research. Underpinning of non-technological means to reduce exposures."

Carlos Orange

almighty1 wrote: »

They mention there is no biological reasoning because finding the cause of any biological disease is inherently difficult.

However the facts are there to read

From a 2010 paper by the same people

"Although not statistically significant, the estimate for childhood leukaemia resembles results of comparable studies. Assuming causality, the estimated attributable risk is below one case per year."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20877338

Obviously 'not statistically significant' doesn't mean there isn't something occurring but it does mean it could just be random chance. 1 case a year in 50 million people is probably quite difficult to separate from chance.

SpaceTime

almighty1 wrote: »

They mention there is no biological reasoning because finding the cause of any biological disease is inherently difficult.

However the facts are there to read



Another report from the UK national cancer institute said this

Did anyone consider that the link could be that the lines are likely to be in proximity to nuclear plants and coal burning plants ? They could also be in very heavily industrial or built up areas.

Did active look at the demographics under the lines and how they might link to slightly higher levels of cancer ?

The link really hasn't been proven in any scientific research that I've read.

Also why isn't there increased cancer for line workers who spend their lives in very close proximity to power lines and have been doing so since the late 19th century.

This isn't some kind of new technology. We've had power lines for over a century.

Things to actually be worried about in Ireland are radon gas, smoking and particulate pollution from open fires. Some small and medium towns have very poor air quality as smokey fuels are allowed.

After that your biggest risks would be things like household chemicals and cosmetics.

There would be more of a risk of say developing cancer due to bad diet etc etc

fits

SpaceTime wrote: »

Did anyone consider that the link could be that the lines are likely to be in proximity to nuclear plants and coal burning plants ? They could also be in very heavily industrial or built up areas.

This is also exactly why any link is difficult to prove (as well as disprove), because it is almost impossible to exclude other factors.

Super-Rush

I had to clean up some posts to make viewing the thread easier on the eye.

Ironic considering the thread subject.

Anyway, for details on how to post pictures that make threads easier to read(especially on mobile) see here.

feargale

Morf wrote: »

What is the alternative?

Water mills and rush candles for Carlow.

almighty1

feargale wrote: »

Water mills and rush candles for Carlow.

There is no direct benefit to Carlow. This project is just linking Newbridge -Wexford - Waterford - Cork that will allow export of electricity to England and France .

Eirgrid (a soon to be privatised company - potentially non-Irish) are intent on making profit without any consideration to the people of Ireland. Other than the tax intake and jobs, the good people of Ireland will not benefit from this project.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

almighty1 wrote: »

There is no direct benefit to Carlow. This project is just linking Newbridge -Wexford - Waterford - Cork that will allow export of electricity to England and France .

Eirgrid (a soon to be privatised company - potentially non-Irish) are intent on making profit without any consideration to the people of Ireland. Other than the tax intake and jobs, the good people of Ireland will not benefit from this project.

Why does that matter. The people of Ireland don't benefit from say Google being in Dublin besides the jobs and the tax take. What obligation does a company have to benefit Ireland?

almighty1

Jayda Salmon Bone wrote: »

Why does that matter. The people of Ireland don't benefit from say Google being in Dublin besides the jobs and the tax take. What obligation does a company have to benefit Ireland?

You understand what we are discussing here? Are Google defiling the countryside with gigantic eyesores and placing the publics health, wealth and happiness behind profit?

zl1whqvjs75cdy

I understand perfectly well thanks so you can climb down off that high horse. You didn't mention the eyesore aspect in the post which I quoted. You were discussing how the electricity carried by the proposed masts will not benefit Irish people as it will be exported. I fail to see why this lack of benefit for the Irish people should be a concern of Eirgrid's. Much like the overall benefit of the Irish people is of no concern to Google.

almighty1

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

I fail to see why this lack of benefit for the Irish people should be a concern of Eirgrid's. Much like the overall benefit of the Irish people is of no concern to Google.

You're comparing apples and oranges. Of course it should be a concern to Eirgrid. They are the ones running the pylons through peoples property. People might be more understanding if there were proposed benefits to the Irish people (it would be in Eirgrids better interests if they pursued this route). The millions raised by the Meath anti-pylon group is justification of that.

fits

I don't think undergrounding is a magic solution either. That sort of disturbance would endanger the habitats of freshwater pearl mussel for example. Underground lines would also need to be sensitively routed.