what's the tower been built near Vistakon For?

Youngblood.III

Passed there the other evening...is it a wind turbine or telecoms?

Cookiemunster

It's a wind turbine. It was in the Leader a few weeks ago.

Youngblood.III

I don't live in the city....but wow, unusual see one that big in suburbia, (I know it's in a industrial area but houses near by)

Boradriver

I was wondering what it was as I passed it yesterday, then saw the blades on it this morning. They're really putting it together quite quickly.

dashoonage

Boradriver wrote: »

I was wondering what it was as I passed it yesterday, then saw the blades on it this morning. They're really putting it together quite quickly.

Passing at 5:30 yesterday evening...no blades..passing this morning...blades...the sneaky feckers using the cover of darkness. :P

Tockman

was planning permission not rejected for the wind turbine?

dashoonage

Tockman wrote: »

was planning permission not rejected for the wind turbine?

Twas granted last year. Refused in 2012 i think.

Insect Overlord

Boradriver wrote: »

I was wondering what it was as I passed it yesterday, then saw the blades on it this morning. They're really putting it together quite quickly.

I remember once seeing a truck struggling to make its way onto the Dock Road after the roundabout from the Shannon Bridge. It was carrying the huge, pre-fab pieces of one of these things. Probably very little assembly to do on-site!

An File

An File wrote: »

I remember once seeing a truck struggling to make its way onto the Dock Road after the roundabout from the Shannon Bridge. It was carrying the huge, pre-fab pieces of one of these things. Probably very little assembly to do on-site!

Worked on them the odd time for a few years when doing my apprenticeship. It's mad how quick they fire them up once the ground work is done. The transport is one of the hardest parts.

jbkenn

40 Kph winds due tomorrow, should give it a good workout

zulutango

I'm looking forward to seeing it!

Anyone got pics?

Tefral

dashoonage wrote: »

Passing at 5:30 yesterday evening...no blades..passing this morning...blades...the sneaky feckers using the cover of darkness. :P

Finished training down in Bohs which have their pitches along side this. The blades were actually being put up as we were training. By the time training was over the crane had moved away and they were turning.

Its designed to generate 3MW a year!

zulutango

cronin_j wrote: »

Finished training down in Bohs which have their pitches along side this. The blades were actually being put up as we were training. By the time training was over the crane had moved away and they were turning.

Its designed to generate 3MW a year!

3 megawatts is its rating presumably, but the actual annual output would be something like 10000 Megawatt-hours I think.

phill106

I work there and it is ENORMOUS and cool
Seen a video of the pieces being delivered by truck, quite impressive from the air. The column was in 2 pieces. They had the upper piece on its end next to it before they installed it, so you could see the cross section as you drove by.
You can now see it from the dublin road too !

jsd1004

phill106 wrote: »

I work there and it is ENORMOUS and cool
Seen a video of the pieces being delivered by truck, quite impressive from the air. The column was in 2 pieces. They had the upper piece on its end next to it before they installed it, so you could see the cross section as you drove by.
You can now see it from the dublin road too !

I passed it today. Ridiculous thing. It needed i think 900 tonnes of concrete for its base. The amount of CO2 emitted in its construction will i guess never be returned in its lifespan.

zulutango

jsd1004 wrote:

I passed it today. Ridiculous thing. It needed i think 900 tonnes of concrete for its base. The amount of CO2 emitted in its construction will i guess never be returned in its lifespan.

You'd be wrong there. The amount of CO2 produced in the construction of turbines is dwarfed by the amount displaced over their lifetimes.

jsd1004

zulutango wrote: »

You'd be wrong there. The amount of CO2 produced in the construction of turbines is dwarfed by the amount displaced over their lifetimes.

A quote would be nice ;-)


http://stopthesethings.com/2014/08/16/how-much-co2-gets-emitted-to-build-a-wind-turbine/

Im all in favour of alternative energy generation sources but without a means of reliably capturing excess energy produced while there is wind these will never work.

Cookiemunster

jsd1004 wrote: »

A quote would be nice ;-)


http://stopthesethings.com/2014/08/16/how-much-co2-gets-emitted-to-build-a-wind-turbine/

Im all in favour of alternative energy generation sources but without a means of reliably capturing excess energy produced while there is wind these will never work.

An article on an anti wind power website is hardly a reliable source.

jsd1004

Cookiemunster wrote: »

An article on an anti wind power website is hardly a reliable source.

I do not know any non influenced pro Wind Power sites!

VikingG

Of course coal burning power plants don't need any steel or concrete in their construction.......

Mr.Carter

We need rain powered alternative energy for Limerick.

jsd1004

VikingG wrote: »

Of course coal burning power plants don't need any steel or concrete in their construction.......

Yes but these are not replacing coal power plants. They are being built with subsidies and do not reduce our dependence on said fossil fuel plants. They would never be built without subsidies. Believe me I'm all in favour of alternative power but these are not the answer. Not at the moment anyway unless technology improves regarding energy storage.

zulutango

jsd1004 wrote: »

Yes but these are not replacing coal power plants. They are being built with subsidies and do not reduce our dependence on said fossil fuel plants. They would never be built without subsidies. Believe me I'm all in favour of alternative power but these are not the answer. Not at the moment anyway unless technology improves regarding energy storage.

I'm not sure how you deduce that they don't reduce our dependance on fossil fuel plant? Also, yes, there are subsidies for wind farms, just as there are subsidies for fossil fuel plants. I'm ok with subsidising clean energy technology such as wind farms and I'd rather we only subsidised those, to be honest. The energy storage argument doesn't hold unless you're talking about having most of your energy coming from wind power, and we're not. There is sufficient buffer in the grid itself such that storage isn't needed. Also, the interconnector with the UK means that we can export excess energy when necessary.

mart 23

Mr.Carter wrote: »

We need rain powered alternative energy for Limerick.

We have in Ardnacrusha.

Goofy

zulutango wrote: »

I'm not sure how you deduce that they don't reduce our dependance on fossil fuel plant? Also, yes, there are subsidies for wind farms, just as there are subsidies for fossil fuel plants. I'm ok with subsidising clean energy technology such as wind farms and I'd rather we only subsidised those, to be honest. The energy storage argument doesn't hold unless you're talking about having most of your energy coming from wind power, and we're not. There is sufficient buffer in the grid itself such that storage isn't needed. Also, the interconnector with the UK means that we can export excess energy when necessary.

For every megawatt of electricity generated by wind we have to have a megawatt of coal, oil or gas on standby (ie burning fuel but not producing electricity) to be able to kick in at a moments notice in case the wind drops. Coal, oil and gas power plants take hours to get up to temperature so they have to be running anyway no matter how much wind energy we produce.

I'm am all for renewable energy but wind will only work if it is used in conjunction with massive amounts of fast acting power plants like hydro, nuclear, pumped storage etc and/or extremely high capacity interconnections with the UK and Europe. We don't have these.

Shannon757

mart 23 wrote: »

We have in Ardnacrusha.

Must be making loads of electricity these days:pac:

zulutango

Goofy wrote: »

For every megawatt of electricity generated by wind we have to have a megawatt of coal, oil or gas on standby (ie burning fuel but not producing electricity) to be able to kick in at a moments notice in case the wind drops. Coal, oil and gas power plants take hours to get up to temperature so they have to be running anyway no matter how much wind energy we produce.

That myth has been debunked many times.

Goofy wrote: »

I'm am all for renewable energy but wind will only work if it is used in conjunction with massive amounts of fast acting power plants like hydro, nuclear, pumped storage etc and/or extremely high capacity interconnections with the UK and Europe. We don't have these.

Obviously as you increase the penetration those issues come more into play, but nobody is talking about just using wind to supply our energy needs. It's an important part of the energy generation mix, and it works well. We do have quite a bit of hydro, some pumped storage and interconnectors with the UK, by the way. We also have combined cycle gas turbine plant which can respond in about 7 seconds.

jsd1004

zulutango wrote: »

That myth has been debunked many times.



Obviously as you increase the penetration those issues come more into play, but nobody is talking about just using wind to supply our energy needs. It's an important part of the energy generation mix, and it works well. We do have quite a bit of hydro, some pumped storage and interconnectors with the UK, by the way. We also have combined cycle gas turbine plant which can respond in about 7 seconds.

Thats great then . So why dont we shut down moneypoint and all the other filthy stations and rely on these and wind turbines?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/10121584/Wind-power-has-failed-to-deliver-what-it-promised.html

crackcrack30

I think its disgusting looking and completely un-necessary to have it where it is....its an obvious ego trip as it could have been placed anywhere (suitable) in the country and used to reduce their electricity bill thru the grid.

All the high ground in the country and they put it in the lowest part of the shannon basin, almost a flood plain & in a city limit to boot.. this stinks of something and the planning dept have again lived up to expectations....

zulutango

crackcrack30 wrote: »

I think its disgusting looking and completely un-necessary to have it where it is....its an obvious ego trip as it could have been placed anywhere (suitable) in the country and used to reduce their electricity bill thru the grid.

All the high ground in the country and they put it in the lowest part of the shannon basin, almost a flood plain & in a city limit to boot.. this stinks of something and the planning dept have again lived up to expectations....

Presumably it's Vistakon's own turbine and is offsetting their energy costs. It would need to be on site for that. They would have applied for planning and there isn't really any legal or legitimate reason for them not to get it.

zulutango

jsd1004 wrote: »

Thats great then . So why dont we shut down moneypoint and all the other filthy stations and rely on these and wind turbines?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/10121584/Wind-power-has-failed-to-deliver-what-it-promised.html

Seriously, have another read of what I said.