Wind farms - ugly truths

Old diesel

Jim Martin wrote: »

I don't think biomass is the answer as it would not be as instantaneous as gas fired!

Your probably right - maybe im wrong in thinking it should be a back up.

But we SHOULD consider finding a home for it in the system - even on smaller scale - as it could be useful in helping meet our renewables targets - as it could be kept going even on low wind days when turbines are not operational.

Using biomass - on a smaller scale - on a continuous basis thus merits been looked at as a short term bridging option while we continue to work towards alternatives to just wind on its own.

Where biomass COULD prove useful is for things like powering a factory - like the Aurivo plant in Co Roscommon - which I understand will even be able to export power to the grid - but im very much open to correction.

Its not a perfect solution for the long term - as there are potential sustainability issues long term.

But maybe that's one of the things we COULD work on in the long term - how can we improve the sustainability of biomass

Old diesel

Macha wrote: »

Biogas?

All options must be carefully considered - the big issue with wind imo at the moment - isn't simply the fact - that its wind.

But the fact that Ireland appears determined to go for a 100 percent wind based solution for our RENEWABLE electricity.

That wouldn't be so bad if Wind was perfect - but it does have flaws - which have been outlined already.

It does have a place in our electricity supply - but we need (short term) to find solutions to the planning issues that cause community concerns - and (long term) work to improve the technology.

Such as - you yourself - alluded to earlier - working to improve the performance of turbines in low winds

Macha

Old diesel wrote: »

That wouldn't be so bad if Wind was perfect - but it does have flaws - which have been outlined already.

It does have a place in our electricity supply - but we need (short term) to find solutions to the planning issues that cause community concerns - and (long term) work to improve the technology.

Such as - you yourself - alluded to earlier - working to improve the performance of turbines in low winds

Every energy technology has it's flaws. That doesn't change the fact we have to move to a near decarbonised energy system as fast as possible.

Totally agree on planning and community concerns.

Old diesel

Macha wrote: »

Every energy technology has it's flaws. That doesn't change the fact we have to move to a near decarbonised energy system as fast as possible.

Totally agree on planning and community concerns.

Your right every energy technology has its flaws - hence why ALL of them need continuous improvement and development.

Who knows - maybe in 20/30 years time - we may be having a thread saying how amazing wind is - due to improvements that were made

Macha

Old diesel wrote: »

Your right every energy technology has its flaws - hence why ALL of them need continuous improvement and development.

Who knows - maybe in 20/30 years time - we may be having a thread saying how amazing wind is - due to improvements that were made

Afraid I can't agree on improving coal or oil plants. CCS is a distraction and justification for people to keep building and running coal plants in full knowledge its never going to happen. Nuclear is sickeningly expensive (plus decommissioning plus fuel disposal costs plus liability plus...)and causes hugely expensive curtailment costs for other more flexible technologies.

Besides, the historic levels of public subsidies into R&D etc of fossil fuel and nuclear technologies would make your head spin - and put the current whinging about renewables subsidies into some well-needed perspective.

All demand side and renewable energy technologies? Sure! By the way, I think we've seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to PV developments.

ted1

Aren't or coal plants used for base load and operate 24 7 using predominately Colombian coal. So cheap American coal has no effect. However shale gas has broken the traditional prince link between oil and gas, so gas is now being use over oil.

The problem with biomass is that we with still are reliant on large quantities of imports or else have to convert a large proportion of our agricultural land and thus push up grain and meat prices.

ted1

Macha wrote: »

Solar panels probably convert about 20% of the sunlight into electricity: coal power probably converts about <0.001% of the original sunlight into electricity. Let's get a bit of perspective on this.

Coal doesn't use sun light, do you mean energy content?

Wind uses a minimal amount is solar radiation. The a small % of sun heats the ground and air, this causes the wind and then we harness it. So wind uses a fraction if a percent of solar

Macha

ted1 wrote: »

Aren't or coal plants used for base load and operate 24 7 using predominately Colombian coal. So cheap American coal has no effect. However shale gas has broken the traditional prince link between oil and gas, so gas is now being use over oil.

The problem with biomass is that we with still are reliant on large quantities of imports or else have to convert a large proportion of our agricultural land and thus push up grain and meat prices.

No, coal plants don't operate 24/7 - we have a wholesale electricity market in Ireland in which plant operators bid in to try to sell their electricity. Seriously, check out the link in my last post and you can read the European coal industry itself explaining it. And it doesn't actually matter where most of our coal comes from - my point is about the price impact of American coal bringing down wholesale electricity prices to the point that coal beats gas. And no, shale gas does not replace oil in most places because most places aren't insane enough to burn oil to generate electricity - the vast, vast majority is used in the transport sector.

If you're really interested, I suggest you read this for an snapshot overview - the Commission published one for every quarter: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/observatory/electricity/doc/20130814_q2_quarterly_report_on_european_electricity_markets.pdf Check out the part about clean dark spreads and clean spark spreads (explained in the glossary at the end).

ted1 wrote: »

Coal doesn't use sun light, do you mean energy content?

Wind uses a minimal amount is solar radiation. The a small % of sun heats the ground and air, this causes the wind and then we harness it. So wind uses a fraction if a percent of solar

Where do you think coal originally comes from?

ted1

I know how the market works I bid into EDIL myself, genreally coal is the cheapest also it has a poor start up time so needs to run constantly

While source isn't relevant the type of coal is. That's why ours is sourced in Colombia

ted1

Macha wrote: »

No, coal plants don't operate 24/7 - we have a wholesale electricity market in Ireland in which plant operators bid in to try to sell their electricity. Seriously, check out the link in my last post and you can read the European coal industry itself explaining it. And it doesn't actually matter where most of our coal comes from - my point is about the price impact of American coal bringing down wholesale electricity prices to the point that coal beats gas. And no, shale gas does not replace oil in most places because most places aren't insane enough to burn oil to generate electricity - the vast, vast majority is used in the transport sector.

If you're really interested, I suggest you read this for an snapshot overview - the Commission published one for every quarter: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/observatory/electricity/doc/20130814_q2_quarterly_report_on_european_electricity_markets.pdf Check out the part about clean dark spreads and clean spark spreads (explained in the glossary at the end).


Where do you think coal originally comes from?

I never said shale gas replaced oil, I said it breaks the traditional link in prices.
There are still several oil plants in Ireland

Macha

ted1 wrote: »

I know how the market works I bid into EDIL myself, genreally coal is the cheapest also it has a poor start up time so needs to run constantly

Given the marginal costs, I would be surprised if wind weren't the cheapest when it's available. Coal is inflexible which means it might bid in at a price lower than covers its costs for that unit of electricity but then it must be betting that the final bid will be high enough to cover its marginal costs otherwise in the long run, it'll be unprofitable.

ted1

Macha wrote: »

Given the marginal costs, I would be surprised if wind weren't the cheapest when it's available. Coal is inflexible which means it might bid in at a price lower than covers its costs for that unit of electricity but then it must be betting that the final bid will be high enough to cover its marginal costs otherwise in the long run, it'll be unprofitable.

Wind doesn't bid into the market. Wind is automatically accepted and takes the SMP (+ what ever is needed to make up the REFIT if needed)

Macha

ted1 wrote: »

I never said shale gas replaced oil, I said it breaks the traditional link in prices.
There are still several oil plants in Ireland

So what exactly did you mean when you said "so gas is now being use over oil"?
Yes, I shudder when I think of our oil plants - and our peat ones.

But the pressure to move away from oil indexation in Europe hasn't come from US shale gas. Gas is still largely a regional market and US shale gas isn't exported to Europe. Instead, it's come about because of the increasing divergence between wholesale gas and oil prices. Many of the contracts were signed when oil prices were much lower and it's now cheaper to buy gas at hubs.

Macha

ted1 wrote: »

Wind doesn't bid into the market. Wind is automatically accepted and takes the SMP (+ what ever is needed to make up the REFIT if needed)

That's strange as my understanding is that wind does bid into the market through an electricity supplier who buys the wind output at a fixed rate and then sells it into the SEM. If the total paid doesn't reach the agreed return, the PSO levy comes into play.

So yes the wind generator themselves may not bid into the market as you describe above but the wind itself is traded. How else would wind be contributing to lower wholesale electricity prices as reported by SEAI, I wonder?

By the way - can I ask what type of electricity you bid in?

fclauson

My understanding (check elec regulations 1999 as amended) is that "renewable" energy has to be used first before any other - which is where the whole ramp for fossil plants comes in we spoke about earlier comes into play. The Wind Generators received a price (guaranteed in law + guaranteed even if they grid does not want the electricity for example in strong winds via constraint payments) not sure how it works after that.

The SEAI suggest the price is dropping because of wind - but you have to then look at the interconnector - the cheapest electricity I believe comes via that from the UK and if Eirgrid had its choice it would get all of it that way (but its not big enough)

There was a newspaper storey which positioned rightly or wrongly that the govt wanted the midlands wind farm to build a new interconnector so they could sell their green energy. It would be paid for by the wind generators. This would grow the IE-UK pipe and allow cheap elect to flow from UK to Ireland because the UK really did not want our wind because they had their own generation and were not so fixed to the European renewable target.

but we creep off topic slightly

ted1

Macha wrote: »

That's strange as my understanding is that wind does bid into the market through an electricity supplier who buys the wind output at a fixed rate and then sells it into the SEM. If the total paid doesn't reach the agreed return, the PSO levy comes into play.

So yes the wind generator themselves may not bid into the market as you describe above but the wind itself is traded. How else would wind be contributing to lower wholesale electricity prices as reported by SEAI, I wonder?

By the way - can I ask what type of electricity you bid in?

Winds bid is zero. So it's automatically accepted. Only small wind farms can sign up to a Power Purchase Agreement. At this the purcasher still enters a zero price.

Everybody who is supplying the grid gets the same price. So if the grid needs 1GW everyone who supplies this may get 50 euro/MWH , where as if the system demand is 6GW everyone might get 350 euro/MWH
I bid in Demand Side Units, effectively we bid in what plants use above their baseload and enter at a high price, which really occurs when the system demand goes above 5.5GW. If accepted and called we shutdown the factory, or bring in their generator.
The company get a fixed price and extra for each thine that they are called. The cost to Eirgrid is Lower than it pays for BNE ( best new entrant)

Macha

ted1 wrote: »

Winds bid is zero. So it's automatically accepted. Only small wind farms can sign up to a Power Purchase Agreement. At this the purcasher still enters a zero price.

Everybody who is supplying the grid gets the same price. So if the grid needs 1GW everyone who supplies this may get 50 euro/MWH , where as if the system demand is 6GW everyone might get 350 euro/MWH
I bid in Demand Side Units, effectively we bid in what plants use above their baseload and enter at a high price, which really occurs when the system demand goes above 5.5GW. If accepted and called we shutdown the factory, or bring in their generator.
The company get a fixed price and extra for each thine that they are called. The cost to Eirgrid is Lower than it pays for BNE ( best new entrant)

Right that makes sense, ie that wind bids in but at zero or near zero. Hydro does the same I guess?

Thanks for the other info - it sounds like a type of balancing market you bid into?

Old diesel

Macha wrote: »

Afraid I can't agree on improving coal or oil plants. CCS is a distraction and justification for people to keep building and running coal plants in full knowledge its never going to happen. Nuclear is sickeningly expensive (plus decommissioning plus fuel disposal costs plus liability plus...)and causes hugely expensive curtailment costs for other more flexible technologies.

Besides, the historic levels of public subsidies into R&D etc of fossil fuel and nuclear technologies would make your head spin - and put the current whinging about renewables subsidies into some well-needed perspective.

All demand side and renewable energy technologies? Sure! By the way, I think we've seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to PV developments.

Sorry I meant renewables options

Old diesel

ted1 wrote: »

Aren't or coal plants used for base load and operate 24 7 using predominately Colombian coal. So cheap American coal has no effect. However shale gas has broken the traditional prince link between oil and gas, so gas is now being use over oil.

The problem with biomass is that we with still are reliant on large quantities of imports or else have to convert a large proportion of our agricultural land and thus push up grain and meat prices.

I agree with your points on the biomass - and really I would see it as a short term solution while we develop renewables in the longer term - which may include developing the sustainability of biomass or indeed improving other tech like wind

Only thing of note however - is that I think you are UNLIKELY to raise meat and grain prices just because Ireland cuts back - we are too small a player.

Bear in mind too - that with beef and dairy production in this country we export in the region of 85 percent of production.

The idea of taking land out of production to grow biomass - is definitely a very serious issue to think about - and not something to do on a whim without a lot of thought - Food security is a VERY serious issue - and likely to become more so in the common years

However - Irelands beef industry is a bit f:mad::mad:ked at the moment - and unless the industry can find a way to address the issues with prices etc - beef could be in bother in this country - which would help free up land for biomass production.

djpbarry

Old diesel wrote: »

However - Irelands beef industry is a bit f:mad::mad:ked at the moment - and unless the industry can find a way to address the issues with prices etc - beef could be in bother in this country - which would help free up land for biomass production.

There's plenty of biomass in Ireland's various waste streams - don't really need to be growing more of it.

fclauson

djpbarry wrote: »

There's plenty of biomass in Ireland's various waste streams - don't really need to be growing more of it.

Which would these be - most biomass from farms near me gets used locally on other farms

djpbarry

fclauson wrote: »

Which would these be...

Well, domestic, for starters.

Old diesel

djpbarry wrote: »

There's plenty of biomass in Ireland's various waste streams - don't really need to be growing more of it.

If we can make it work - bring it on

fclauson

djpbarry wrote: »

Well, domestic, for starters.

So you proposal would be to collect biomass (food, garden waste etc) from households and then burn this to create energy ?

Interested to see the ROI/Costs with this approch

djpbarry

fclauson wrote: »

So you proposal would be to collect biomass (food, garden waste etc) from households and then burn this to create energy ?

Interested to see the ROI/Costs with this approch

Probably more cost effective to use it as a carbon source in biogas generation.

Macha

fclauson wrote: »

So you proposal would be to collect biomass (food, garden waste etc) from households and then burn this to create energy ?

Interested to see the ROI/Costs with this approch

The thing is, it breaks down anyway when we put it in a landfill and the biogas is captured. But if we were to divert it away from landfill in the first place, we could probably deal with it a lot more efficiently and avoid methane leaking from our landfills.

The only caveat I have on all bioenergy waste and residues, is that in theory it should be something of a diminishing resource. We have lots of people working very hard to cut food waste, etc. So it can only ever be a limited sustainable resource that should be used only in the most efficient installations (e.g. CHP, no electricity-only installations) and I believe they should also be electricity-led to provide flexibility to the electricity system as biomass is dispatchable.

djpbarry

Macha wrote: »

The only caveat I have on all bioenergy waste and residues, is that in theory it should be something of a diminishing resource.

Very good point, but we're always going to have (for example) copious amounts of human waste!

ted1

djpbarry wrote: »

Very good point, but we're always going to have (for example) copious amounts of human waste!

Like the one in shankill http://www.secadolodos.com/73052_en/SHANGANAGH-WWTP-%25E2%2580%2593-Digested-sludge-drying/

We'll never get the materials needed for it to make a difference. The incinerator in rings end was going to be a waste recovery unit how ever that was a disaster and the figures indicated that they would have to divert receyable products to it just to fed it.


We have 5 or 6 biomass landfill generation stations but the output from them is tiny ,
http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Renewables_Publications_/Energy_From_Waste/landfillfacts.pdf

Old diesel

Macha wrote: »

The thing is, it breaks down anyway when we put it in a landfill and the biogas is captured. But if we were to divert it away from landfill in the first place, we could probably deal with it a lot more efficiently and avoid methane leaking from our landfills.

The only caveat I have on all bioenergy waste and residues, is that in theory it should be something of a diminishing resource. We have lots of people working very hard to cut food waste, etc. So it can only ever be a limited sustainable resource that should be used only in the most efficient installations (e.g. CHP, no electricity-only installations) and I believe they should also be electricity-led to provide flexibility to the electricity system as biomass is dispatchable.

I hate to mention the war - but we do have waste from cattle - plus we can use Grass silage - with that slurry.

Drawbacks to doing that obviously - but it is a POTENTIAL option - not saying its good (or bad) - but it is a POTENTIAL option.

Yes I know it has drawbacks - but could it be improved????

fclauson

Old diesel wrote: »

I hate to mention the war - but we do have waste from cattle - plus we can use Grass silage - with that slurry.

Drawbacks to doing that obviously - but it is a POTENTIAL option - not saying its good (or bad) - but it is a POTENTIAL option.

Yes I know it has drawbacks - but could it be improved????

This is all spread back onto the fields to fertilize. No idea if there would be more benefit in using it elsewhere for energy.

Capturing cows breath would be more effective as that's where there methane comes from

Old diesel

fclauson wrote: »

This is all spread back onto the fields to fertilize. No idea if there would be more benefit in using it elsewhere for energy.

Capturing cows breath would be more effective as that's where there methane comes from

Its been a while since I looked it up - but basically Aneorobic digestion is the process in question - ive spelt it wrong.

Basically the cattle slurry combined with something like Grass silage can be combined - and go through a process - which then generates gas - which can be used for electricity - and if the gas is good enough - can be used as gas - for the gas network afaik.

Its not a perfect solution however - and does have its drawbacks

ted1

Old diesel wrote: »

I hate to mention the war - but we do have waste from cattle - plus we can use Grass silage - with that slurry.

our cattle graze most the time so it's impractical to use it, also the energy required to transport it to the facility is greater than that achieved from using it. so its not practical. I've seen the studies.

Old diesel

ted1 wrote: »

our cattle graze most the time so it's impractical to use it, also the energy required to transport it to the facility is greater than that achieved from using it. so its not practical. I've seen the studies.

We can look at adjusting the grazing routine - so cattle are in at night (grass can be zero grazed - tractor and zero grazing machine go around cutting and picking up grass and hauling it in.

Also could possibly look at using more local smaller facilities to reduce the transport distance.

Of course - like most renewable energy solutions - it does need improvement - getting more performance from less product - like wind turbines do.

Again not saying its good or bad - it just merits consideration in terms of FUTURE development and (small scale) implantation

Clearly if you had one big massive plant for the whole country - it can run into issues.

Germany does a fair amount of it (that doesn't make it good or bad - just demonstrates IT CAN be done)

Not a fan of biogas or a supporter of it - but feel we need to keep ALL options open for future development

It certainly has drawbacks - but it is a source of power that could be developed NOW

So its further down the road of development compared to say Ocean Energy - and is potentially more suited to Ireland now - then Solar.

Old diesel

So fair enough Biogas from cattle slurry and grass silage may be off the agenda - yes I do feel that it merits NOT BEEN ruled out - pending further needed development to make it better - address its flaws.

But the latter couple of points apply to wind turbines as well - so getting back to those - how can Wind turbine technology be improved - if it can in fact even be improved - to improve the consistency of its performance - and ensure infrasound and noise issues are mimimised and eliminated????

In short how can wind turbines be made better - it seems to me - part of the issue with wind turbines - is that TOO MANY people accept or tolerate them for what they are now - rather then asking - can the turbines be made better.

Even small increases in turbine performance for individual turbines could make a difference when added up across a fleet of 1500 to 2000 turbines.

Id like to see constant development of turbine technology - with a renewed focus on making them more compatible - if that is even possible - with pleasant community living - and improved performance.

So that we move to a policy of always using the best turbine technology available at the time - so theres an incentive for manufacturers to deliver the best technology at all times

Capt'n Midnight

OK we now have Irish numbers that include the effects renewables have on other generators.


http://www.seai.ie/News_Events/Press_Releases/2014/245m-of-fossil-fuel-savings-from-use-of-renewable-electricity-in-2012.html

Renewable electricity generation in the Republic of Ireland is estimated to have saved 778 ktoe of fossil fuel,with an associated CO2emissions reduction of 1.94million tonnes. Wind generation is the largest
contributor, with savings estimated at 586 ktoe of fossil-fueland a CO2emissions reduction of 1.51 million
tonnes.
...
The value of the fossil fuels not consumed in the Republic of Ireland in 2012 as a result of renewable
electricity generation is estimated at €245 million, with the value of avoided CO2 emissions being a
further €15 million.
...
78% of the fuel savings due to renewable electricity arose from the displacement of natural gas, with 20%
coming from reduced use of coal. The remaining 2% is due to the displacement of peat through co-firing
with biomass.

Birdnuts

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

OK we now have Irish numbers that include the effects renewables have on other generators.


http://www.seai.ie/News_Events/Press_Releases/2014/245m-of-fossil-fuel-savings-from-use-of-renewable-electricity-in-2012.html

Are we meant to be impressed by a mere 2% reduction in imports and a less than 3% reduction in CO2 emmissions??. Despite the massive amount of wind power already installed!!. Other interesting facts about this report in the link below

http://www.windawareireland.com/building-monster-misplaced-good-intentions/

Is all this worth having the 4th most expensive power bills in Europe??

djpbarry

Birdnuts wrote: »

Are we meant to be impressed by a mere 2% reduction in imports and a less than 3% reduction in CO2 emmissions??

Why express savings as a percentage of total fuel imports? Bit daft expecting wind to have an impact outside of electricity generation.

Birdnuts

djpbarry wrote: »

Why express savings as a percentage of total fuel imports? Bit daft expecting wind to have an impact outside of electricity generation.

Isn't this all about significantly lowering Irelands emissions and cheaper electricity - wind has failed badly on both counts as it has across the EU. SEAI used a particular dispatch model in this analysis that does not cover all the CO2 emissions from a wind based system. Saying wind powered a certain number of homes is also ridiculous given the fact that for extended periods of time wind was contributing figures below 1% of its installed capacity.

Old diesel

Just a question I was thinking of this morning - do we know at all - of any communities that have commercial wind farms with the 100/150 metre type wind turbines in their area and that have

a) continued to thrive and grow - and continue to be nice places to live

or

b) are actually finding the turbines to be an asset to their communities

Do such communities exist - and if so - what lessons can be learned

Macha

Birdnuts wrote: »

Isn't this all about significantly lowering Irelands emissions and cheaper electricity - wind has failed badly on both counts as it has across the EU.

Evidence? Wind is lowering wholesale electricity prices across Europe. And we're just discussing a report that shows that wind has helped reduce Ireland's carbon emissions. You're wilfully ignoring evidence put before you and throwing out unsubstantiated claims to the contrary - and convincing no one in the process.

Old diesel wrote: »

Just a question I was thinking of this morning - do we know at all - of any communities that have commercial wind farms with the 100/150 metre type wind turbines in their area and that have

a) continued to thrive and grow - and continue to be nice places to live

or

b) are actually finding the turbines to be an asset to their communities

Do such communities exist - and if so - what lessons can be learned

Yes, they're all across Europe! What's different about Ireland? We have lots of people who in recent years have moved to live in the countryside but their livelihoods aren't actually connected to the countryside. They moved for the 'view' and will oppose anything that they perceive as negatively impacting on that view.

Birdnuts

Macha wrote: »

Evidence? Wind is lowering wholesale electricity prices across Europe. And we're just discussing a report that shows that wind has helped reduce Ireland's carbon emissions. You're wilfully ignoring evidence put before you and throwing out unsubstantiated claims to the contrary - and convincing no one in the process.


.

Winds costs in terms of subsidies, pylon roll out, back up plants etc. does not show up in bogus wholesale prices as you well know. Which is why wind apologists will always refer to "wholesale" prices as opposed to "retail" prices which is what the consumer and business gets hit with. Ireland would want to cop on fast and learn from the costly mistakes of Germany and more recently Spain.

Macha

Birdnuts wrote: »

Winds costs in terms of subsidies, pylon roll out, back up plants etc. does not show up in bogus wholesale prices as you well know. Which is why wind apologists will always refer to "wholesale" prices as opposed to "retail" prices which is what the consumer and business gets hit with. Ireland would want to cop on fast and learn from the costly mistakes of Germany and more recently Spain.

Because Ireland has regulated retail prices that means the cheaper wholesale electricity prices aren't always passed on. Who's to blame for that? The Irish government and the energy regulator.

And do you have any idea how much fossil fuels and other non-renewable technologies have been subsidised over the years and how much they continue to be subsidised? Or how much they need energy infrastructure and add costs to the system?

Please try to contribute with facts not ill-informed rants. I note that again, your above post has zero references.

Birdnuts

Macha wrote: »

Because Ireland has regulated retail prices that means the cheaper wholesale electricity prices aren't always passed on. Who's to blame for that? The Irish government and the energy regulator.

And do you have any idea how much fossil fuels and other non-renewable technologies have been subsidised over the years and how much they continue to be subsidised? Or how much they need energy infrastructure and add costs to the system?

Please try to contribute with facts not ill-informed rants. I note that again, your above post has zero references.

Ireland is no different to the likes of Denmark and Germany whose retail bills continue to spiral as they add more and more wind to their grid.

Macha

Birdnuts wrote: »

Ireland is no different to the likes of Denmark and Germany whose retail bills continue to spiral as they add more and more wind to their grid.

Still waiting for some facts to back up your claims.

Old diesel

Macha wrote: »

Evidence? Wind is lowering wholesale electricity prices across Europe. And we're just discussing a report that shows that wind has helped reduce Ireland's carbon emissions. You're wilfully ignoring evidence put before you and throwing out unsubstantiated claims to the contrary - and convincing no one in the process.


Yes, they're all across Europe! What's different about Ireland? We have lots of people who in recent years have moved to live in the countryside but their livelihoods aren't actually connected to the countryside. They moved for the 'view' and will oppose anything that they perceive as negatively impacting on that view.

Whats different about Irish planning of wind farms - is that it appears to be the case that communities are just seen as places to put wind farms.

Now if communities are living great - with wind farms around Europe - then we need to look at that - and see how we can change our living to do that over here.

So if we look at Europe and say - they normally are much more inclined to live in Towns and villages over there (in rural areas) then how do we plan that sort of future for Rural communities over here.

My issue is - we don't have that sort of planning here - we are just focused on getting wind turbines in - and theres no positive thinking - on how you MIGHT create a positive future for communities as communities.

Rather then just see communities and rural people as a problem - why not lets work together to see if a situation can be developed over time that would see communities and wind projects work okay side by side.

The problem at the moment that I see - is that wind is just another difficulty rural communities have to work with - the way they are planned is posing yet more difficulties for rural areas - in that we are only looking at communities as places to put turbines.

That sends a negative signal to communities on how we see their future - if they are just going to be a site for a wind farm - it suggests they are been written off.

That's just how i feel.

Btw - poor planning in the past - doesn't excuse poor planning now - in fact if anything - it should lead to better planning if we learn lessons from the past.

Old diesel

At the end of the day - its easier to get people on board with wind energy - or any other project - if they can see that their community, their village, their town etc - can still enjoy a positive future.

So lets plan for the wind energy by all means - but lets also look at how peoples everyday living can be kept pleasant - all im hoping for basically is that we do the best we can to ensure as many residents as possible continue to enjoy pleasant living in their homes.

Where this isn't possible - where a home that was previously pleasant to live in - is no longer pleasant - then we need to look at compensation for that - whether its CPO at a fair market price - or other forms of compensation.

And if compensation does need to be paid - we need to factor that againsed the cost of having some turbines off shore

Please note - the only compensation i would be looking for - is where a home that was previously pleasant to live in - is no longer pleasant to live in due to a project operational in the area.

Capt'n Midnight

Birdnuts wrote: »

Are we meant to be impressed by a mere 2% reduction in imports and a less than 3% reduction in CO2 emmissions??. Despite the massive amount of wind power already installed!!. Other interesting facts about this report in the link below

http://www.windawareireland.com/building-monster-misplaced-good-intentions/

Is all this worth having the 4th most expensive power bills in Europe??

2% / 3% only applies if you include fuel used in transport and heating, industrial processing
You might as well include asphalt used for road surfacing and wood used in construction in your analysis of Wind's contribution to electricity.


But the fact that people have gone so out of their way to distort the facts shows that wind is really making a difference.

Birdnuts

Macha wrote: »

Yes, they're all across Europe! What's different about Ireland? We have lots of people who in recent years have moved to live in the countryside but their livelihoods aren't actually connected to the countryside. They moved for the 'view' and will oppose anything that they perceive as negatively impacting on that view.

Ireland wind energy policy is developer driven - just like our disastrous Celtic tiger planning system was, and we know how that ended.

Birdnuts

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

But the fact that people have gone so out of their way to distort the facts shows that wind is really making a difference.

The facts are that wind is making a negligible difference to Ireland CO2 emmissions, even if you overlook the shortcomings of SEAI analysis which itself has been revised a number of times going on earlier NREAP documents.

Birdnuts

Macha wrote: »

Still waiting for some facts to back up your claims.

Care to dispute any of the facts in the links below??

http://www.tumbit.com/news/articles/8642-spain-announces-details-of-green-energy-subsidy-cuts.html

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304851104579361103986679382

http://www.realclearenergy.org/charticles/2013/10/25/renewables_costing_germany__denmark_billions_107305.html


http://theenergycollective.com/lindsay-wilson/279126/average-electricity-prices-around-world-kwh

http://theenergycollective.com/maxluke/274041/trash-trees-and-taxes

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/338781/high-renewable-energy-costs-damage-germanys-economy