Wind energy private corporations and government.

ShowMeTheCash

Just want to get an idea of people's thoughts around private corporations and wind energy.

Recently a wind turbine has been put up in area, the wind turbine had originally been refused planning by the local authority but was overturned to the dismay of residents who are in a fairly close proximity to the turbine itself.

Should wind turbines be a private enterprise?

Currently I think Ireland buys almost 90% of it's energy from the UK and elsewhere so I kind of understand private companies reselling the energy in the free market space it's not ours nor do we make it, but should private companies be allowed to harness a renewable and local energy source only to sell it back to the indigenous population purely for profit?

I recently watched the movie Atlantic that is doing the rounds which talk about Ireland back in the 80s and how Ray Burke essentially committed "economic treason" buy removing the tax levy on the gas and oil being extracted from our land.

I feel there is something inherently wrong with what is currently happening while people are being distracted with the "Green energy" idea.

I am not fully up-to-speed on the turbine corporations currently in operation in Ireland how they work and what part the state have in this so if anyone has information they can reference I would be grateful.

Seth Brundle

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Recently a wind turbine has been put up in area, the wind turbine had originally been refused planning by the local authority but was overturned to the dismay of residents who are in a fairly close proximity to the turbine itself.

Overturned on what grounds?
If you were briefed properly why were you all dismayed?

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Should wind turbines be a private enterprise?

Why not?

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Currently I think Ireland buys almost 90% of it's energy from the UK and elsewhere so I kind of understand private companies reselling the energy in the free market space it's not ours nor do we make it, but should private companies be allowed to harness a renewable and local energy source only to sell it back to the indigenous population purely for profit?

Why not?
Plus in terms of them dojng "purely for profit" why else would they do it?

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I recently watched the movie Atlantic that is doing the rounds which talk about Ireland back in the 80s and how Ray Burke essentially committed "economic treason" buy removing the tax levy on the gas and oil being extracted from our land.

If it was that great a deal, why aren't more company's over exploiting our resources?
Plus, we tax them once they start extracting the reserves.

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I feel there is something inherently wrong with what is currently happening while people are being distracted with the "Green energy" idea.

Were not distracted. We committed to increasing renewable energy. Wind forms part of this plan...

"Under the 2009 Renewable Energy Directive, Ireland is committed to produce from renewable sources at least 16% of all energy consumed by 2020."
Source: http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/energy/en-ie/Renewable-Energy/Pages/home.aspx#

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I am not fully up-to-speed on the turbine corporations currently in operation in Ireland how they work and what part the state have in this so if anyone has information they can reference I would be grateful.

Did you try Google yet?

ShowMeTheCash

kbannon wrote: »

Overturned on what grounds?

I do not know on what grounds, no information was provided.
I know Donegal CC denied planning I think twice but it was over turned by board pleanala in Dublin.
It has caused an upset as the decision simply got made without any further discussions with local residence.

kbannon wrote: »

If you were briefed properly why were you all dismayed?

See above.

kbannon wrote: »

Why not?

Because it is a short sited and I would liken it to eating the goose that lays the golden eggs!

Do you think private corporations should own the ability for a country to produce electricity? Do you think that would be a good idea? Personally I think it madness!

Why not do like Norway with Stat oil or like Canada? Where the economic fruit from a nation like oil or gas or even wind is pumped back into the country not some corporation...

Set up a state owned business to ensure that it's national resource is not squandered to benefit a small few.

A national resource like wind I think should not be sold to corporations, albeit wind energy is renewable but there is only ever going to be so many sites for turbine energy to be produced so there is a finite amount.

Do you know what happened in the 80s with the Oil and Gas off the coast or Cork and Kerry? As a national resource do you know how much Ireland benefited from that? Do you think that was a good idea?

kbannon wrote: »

Why not?
Plus in terms of them dojng "purely for profit" why else would they do it?

It's not about the profit it's about letting a private corporation exploit our state.

kbannon wrote: »

If it was that great a deal, why aren't more company's over exploiting our resources?
Plus, we tax them once they start extracting the reserves.

Do you watch the news? We are probably the most exploited country in the EU. Look at our fishing quotas in our own waters? Look at the tax breaks large corporations get?
When the Oil was extracted Ray Burke done away with taxation which was originally set at 50% they called it a state give away!
Burke was later jailed in the 90s for tax fraud...

kbannon wrote: »

Were not distracted. We committed to increasing renewable energy. Wind forms part of this plan...

"Under the 2009 Renewable Energy Directive, Ireland is committed to produce from renewable sources at least 16% of all energy consumed by 2020."
Source: http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/energy/en-ie/Renewable-Energy/Pages/home.aspx#



Did you try Google yet?

I already knew this, I am not against green energy as a whole I think it is a good idea, but we are distracted, even from your response it becomes evident how distracted we are.

I am all for free enterprise is most things, it helps promote a competitive industrial sector. But natural resources or naturally occurring resources I feel need to be guarded to benefit the state not corporations.

Make no mistake, the oil issue back in the 80s was amid allegations of bribes and corruption.

ShowMeTheCash

Just to follow up.

I am looking for information on the major corporations/companies that are putting up the turbines.
How many energy corporations do we have working on them in the state? How many thus far do we have?
What hand does the government have to play in it?
What legislation has been made with regards turbines and the locations in which they can be erected.

One thing I took from the film documentary Atlantic was guys on the rigs said the the corporations deliberately play down exactly how much money was going to be made from the exaction of the oil and gas they even went as far to get rid of all the Irish riggers.

ShowMeTheCash

This is not about turbines but it is about corporations and the state.

Seth Brundle

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I do not know on what grounds, no information was provided.
I know Donegal CC denied planning I think twice but it was over turned by board pleanala in Dublin.
It has caused an upset as the decision simply got made without any further discussions with local residence.

I'm surprised that you are unaware of the reason for approval
What further discussions should local residents have? They should have already made their views clear through the original planning applications.

Is this the case you are referring to (which incidentally was refused and widely reported on)?

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Because it is a short sited and I would liken it to eating the goose that lays the golden eggs!

Do you think private corporations should own the ability for a country to produce electricity? Do you think that would be a good idea? Personally I think it madness!

Why not do like Norway with Stat oil or like Canada? Where the economic fruit from a nation like oil or gas or even wind is pumped back into the country not some corporation...

Set up a state owned business to ensure that it's national resource is not squandered to benefit a small few.

A national resource like wind I think should not be sold to corporations, albeit wind energy is renewable but there is only ever going to be so many sites for turbine energy to be produced so there is a finite amount.

Firstly you object to private organisations being able to produce energy. If we left it to the government to build the required windfarms, how much would it cost, what other services would need to be curtailed to facilitate this spend and how long would it take?
Secondly, you cannot stop competition. Why should the state be able to operate within a vacuum? Do you really think we would get a satisfactory level of service then? Sure look at water provision as a good comparison!
Thirdly, they are not selling wind. How can you sell wind? In terms of the finite amount of sites for wind turbines, I don't think we're anywhere near this so your point is moot!

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Do you know what happened in the 80s with the Oil and Gas off the coast or Cork and Kerry? As a national resource do you know how much Ireland benefited from that? Do you think that was a good idea?

We've drifted from a planning application that you seem to have a problem with to oil and gas exploration in the 80s.
Have you a point exactly?
Are you just wanting us to stop all mineral exploration by private companys and have our government do it (despite having no experience in the field)?
What else should we limit from private companys? Water? Solar? Wave?

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

It's not about the profit it's about letting a private corporation exploit our state.

How is the state being exploited?

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Do you watch the news? We are probably the most exploited country in the EU. Look at our fishing quotas in our own waters? Look at the tax breaks large corporations get?
When the Oil was extracted Ray Burke done away with taxation which was originally set at 50% they called it a state give away!
Burke was later jailed in the 90s for tax fraud...

Forget about Burke firstly.
Secondly, in terms of our fishing quotas, my belief is that we should be reducing these completely but nonetheless, we have made so much money from being in the EU that fishing possibly was

In terms of the giveaway, the DCENR state: "Petroleum Production Tax (PPT) to apply at variable rate of 0% to 40% linked to profitability of discoveries. Minimum annual PPT payment of 5% the gross revenues of a field once production has commenced. PPT permitted as a deduction from Corporation Tax. Marginal tax take rises from 40% to 55%"
Not really a give away, is it?
URL="http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/natural-resources/en-ie/Oil-Gas-Exploration-Production/Pages/Oil-and-Gas-Tax-Terms.aspx#"]Source[/URL

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I already knew this, I am not against green energy as a whole I think it is a good idea, but we are distracted, even from your response it becomes evident how distracted we are.

I am all for free enterprise is most things, it helps promote a competitive industrial sector. But natural resources or naturally occurring resources I feel need to be guarded to benefit the state not corporations.

Make no mistake, the oil issue back in the 80s was amid allegations of bribes and corruption.

I've no doubt given everything that we have since heard.
Now please show me a company that is currently exploiting our reserves by taking it without giving us any tax money.

Seth Brundle

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Just to follow up.

I am looking for information on the major corporations/companies that are putting up the turbines.
How many energy corporations do we have working on them in the state? How many thus far do we have?
What hand does the government have to play in it?
What legislation has been made with regards turbines and the locations in which they can be erected.

One thing I took from the film documentary Atlantic was guys on the rigs said the the corporations deliberately play down exactly how much money was going to be made from the exaction of the oil and gas they even went as far to get rid of all the Irish riggers.

:rolleyes:

Right, I'm out!

I'd recommend that you get yourself a tin foil hat but the aluminium was possibly refined by Aughinish Alumina, a private organisation!

listermint

Id be of the opinion that rather than importing 80-90% of our Energy needs the government need to pull the finger our and get involved in the renewables sector wholesale.

Its the type of industry that we could be world leaders in, It would stimulate and create jobs that are simply lost in other sectors.

It would remove that reliance on foreign energy importation, It could provide revenue through export.

It would eliminate vast portions of our requirements to pay for Carbon usage.

Frankly its a no brainer, Rather than poorly implementing tax breaks for edgits putting in insulation and rendering outside of homes and taxing the arse of the same edgits to get accredited in a sector. Ireland could be making some serious and valuable choices for both the future of Jobs in the country and Resource Management.


But Politicians are only looking towards the next election

ShowMeTheCash

kbannon wrote: »

I'm surprised that you are unaware of the reason for approval
What further discussions should local residents have? They should have already made their views clear through the original planning applications.

Is this the case you are referring to (which incidentally was refused and widely reported on)?

This is the one:

Decision: Case has been decided, details will not be available before 28-Mar-2016

So this only became apparent a few weeks back people are still sifting through the reasons why.
Being this was so widely reported on do you know why it was overturned?

I will need to read the documents you provided in the link.

kbannon wrote: »

Firstly you object to private organizations being able to produce energy. If we left it to the government to build the required windfarms, how much would it cost, what other services would need to be curtailed to facilitate this spend and how long would it take?

So this is the argument most people make when this kind of short sighted approach happens, ever our own government uses the same line.

It will cost too much, we do not have the expertise and our government are literally incompetent.

Granted government never admit to being incompetent but I do harbor the same concerns as you above when it comes to government.

But this is an investment, if a corporation can make a profit from this then so can a state funded company you are arguing short term implications over long term benefits..

kbannon wrote: »

Secondly, you cannot stop competition. Why should the state be able to operate within a vacuum? Do you really think we would get a satisfactory level of service then? Sure look at water provision as a good comparison!
Thirdly, they are not selling wind. How can you sell wind? In terms of the finite amount of sites for wind turbines, I don't think we're anywhere near this so your point is moot!

Again I think this is a short sighted approach and you are now jumping to extremes, I have no issue with the private sector in general, i have no issue with private corporations reselling energy that we currently buy in.

I even have no issue with private corporations competing for the contracts to build and install the turbines. My issue is specific to wind farms as a naturally occurring and renewable resource being sold off.

As it being a moot point, how many turbines would Ireland need to be self sufficient with regards energy?? How many do we have?

It's not a moot point but a long term concern. Corporations are already putting legislation in place to sue governments if they try and change legislation around this stuff or interfere with their projected profits somehow I do not think they see it as a moot point.

kbannon wrote: »

We've drifted from a planning application that you seem to have a problem with to oil and gas exploration in the 80s.
Have you a point exactly?

My issue is not with the planning application my issue is with large corporations and how they can circumnavigate and exploit and area for their own financial gain.
I make comparisons to what happened in the 80s with Oil and gas and how now looking back we basically sold off a state owned natural resource, I think at the time it was reported in the news as "economic treason" I just do not want to look back 20/30 years from now and thing the same about the large corporations who control the electrical power in our state which is generated on Irish soil.

kbannon wrote: »

Are you just wanting us to stop all mineral exploration by private companys and have our government do it (despite having no experience in the field)?
What else should we limit from private companys? Water? Solar? Wave?

I hear this same drum beat "have no experience in the field" I think it is a favorite of government to justify selling off a natural commodity.

When these corporations come in you will find they usually source the geologists and experts locally but let's ignore this for a second.

So I will take your point but there is middle ground here, Canada when working with corporations will agree on a state owned percentage and state involvement if it is state owned like minerals, oil, gas etc...

But perhaps that too good an idea for Ireland.

kbannon wrote: »

How is the state being exploited?

How is it not, it seems your argument is, our government is too stupid to do it so let the corporations do it and albeit I would kind of agree with that it is still exploitation!

kbannon wrote: »

Forget about Burke firstly.
Secondly, in terms of our fishing quotas, my belief is that we should be reducing these completely but nonetheless, we have made so much money from being in the EU that fishing possibly was

The fishing argument is a larger argument we can side step this.

kbannon wrote: »

In terms of the giveaway, the DCENR state: "Petroleum Production Tax (PPT) to apply at variable rate of 0% to 40% linked to profitability of discoveries. Minimum annual PPT payment of 5% the gross revenues of a field once production has commenced. PPT permitted as a deduction from Corporation Tax. Marginal tax take rises from 40% to 55%"
Not really a give away, is it?
URL="http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/natural-resources/en-ie/Oil-Gas-Exploration-Production/Pages/Oil-and-Gas-Tax-Terms.aspx#"]Source[/URL

I do not know what to say to this the PPT came in when? 2014 we are talking about a give away that happened in the 80s and a reserve that has been all but depleted the original proposal back in the 70s was that Ireland get 50% royalties but it was negotiated to 12.5%

So yes it was a give away.

kbannon wrote: »

I've no doubt given everything that we have since heard.
Now please show me a company that is currently exploiting our reserves by taking it without giving us any tax money.

Have a read of this.

http://www.shelltosea.com/content/gas-oil-robbery

ShowMeTheCash

kbannon wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Right, I'm out!

I'd recommend that you get yourself a tin foil hat but the aluminium was possibly refined by Aughinish Alumina, a private organisation!

I'd recommend you take yours off :P

ShowMeTheCash

kbannon wrote: »

I'm surprised that you are unaware of the reason for approval
What further discussions should local residents have? They should have already made their views clear through the original planning applications.

Is this the case you are referring to (which incidentally was refused and widely reported on).

Actually just reading through it this is not the same, albeit very similar but this is a different location.

Markcheese

ShowMeTheCash wrote:

Make no mistake, the oil issue back in the 80s was amid allegations of bribes and corruption.

I dont think a single commercial oil well ever got developed... I have no doubt that envelopes could/would/ were passed around but no oil got given away.. cos what ever was in the ground is still in the ground..
I've read a bit about how wind turbines should be community run ect.
Not a lot of communities own land, the owner (usually a farmer) aint gonna give it away and its still the same turbine in the same place,with the same neighbours no matter who owns it..

moleyv

Wind turbines are typically given 25 year permissions. After that, reapply. If it turns out they were a huge mistake, refuse any further permissions....

Airtricity, bord na Mona, bord gais are just a few companies. There are lots more that operate at a regional level.

If you want the government to charge for companies using wind :v, you may as well ask them to start charging us for using sunlight to make vitamins.

There are wind development guidelines, you will find them on environ.ie in the guidelines subsection of the planning section.

There is no quantitative strategy for how much wind energy should be developed.

Typically a LA will have maps splitting the county into three types of area regarding wind development.

Suitable, open for consideration and unsuitable.

Suitability being more related to topography, rather than how good the site is for generating power potential.

I suggest you educate yourself on the above points and make a more concentrated rant.

ShowMeTheCash

Markcheese wrote: »

I dont think a single commercial oil well ever got developed... I have no doubt that envelopes could/would/ were passed around but no oil got given away.. cos what ever was in the ground is still in the ground..
I've read a bit about how wind turbines should be community run ect.
Not a lot of communities own land, the owner (usually a farmer) aint gonna give it away and its still the same turbine in the same place,with the same neighbours no matter who owns it..

I would not expect a farmer to give it away either but that does not mean it cannot be community lead.

I think as it stands farmers get an annual payment or lease the land.

Again this might just be here say but I have heard that a single turbine could produce up to 1 million in revenue per year, like a corporation an offer would need to be put in place to lease the land.

BoJack Horseman

Essentially you want the state to fund more turbines, so long as they are not near you?

You will be pleased to know that most electricity is already provided by the government.
Every government says that they want to increase production from renewables.
But tbh, there is not vast amounts of money available to do that.
Doing so is costly & would probably require higher bills if monies from central government were not forthcoming.

ShowMeTheCash

moleyv wrote: »

Wind turbines are typically given 25 year permissions. After that, reapply. If it turns out they were a huge mistake, refuse any further permissions....

Airtricity, bord na Mona, bord gais are just a few companies. There are lots more that operate at a regional level.

If you want the government to charge for companies using wind :v, you may as well ask them to start charging us for using sunlight to make vitamins.

I do not want the government to charge companies for wind energy I want the government to play a bigger part in the development of renewable energies and ensure that large corporations do not come in and ride roughshod over the indigenous population.

moleyv wrote: »

There are wind development guidelines, you will find them on environ.ie in the guidelines subsection of the planning section.

I have seem some of these and I have also seen restrictions on how close to dwellings a turbine should be shot down purely because it does not make economic sense to the companies.

moleyv wrote: »

There is no quantitative strategy for how much wind energy should be developed.

Typically a LA will have maps splitting the county into three types of area regarding wind development.

Suitable, open for consideration and unsuitable.

Suitability being more related to topography, rather than how good the site is for generating power potential.

I suggest you educate yourself on the above points and make a more concentrated rant.

I opened this thread exactly for that reason:
I think in my opening I ask

"I am not fully up-to-speed on the turbine corporations currently in operation in Ireland how they work and what part the state have in this so if anyone has information they can reference I would be grateful."

I further go on and ask

"I am looking for information on the major corporations/companies that are putting up the turbines.
How many energy corporations do we have working on them in the state? How many thus far do we have?
What hand does the government have to play in it?
What legislation has been made with regards turbines and the locations in which they can be erected."

Before make obtuse comments I suggest you brush up on your basic comprehension.

ShowMeTheCash

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Essentially you want the state to fund more turbines, so long as they are not near you?

You will be pleased to know that most electricity is already provided by the government.
Every government says that they want to increase production from renewables.
But tbh, there is not vast amounts of money available to do that.
Doing so is costly & would probably require higher bills if monies from central government were not forthcoming.

I do not mind them being near me that is not the issue I have, I just want to be sure if the landscape of an area it so be impacted upon it at least in some way goes to the benefit of the people of Ireland an not to make large corporations richer.

Again you argue the short term vs the long term.
Corporations are not doing this to make a loss they are doing this to make a long term gain. Would you not consider this short sighted?

BoJack Horseman

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Again you argue the short term vs the long term.
Corporations are not doing this to make a loss they are doing this to make a long term gain. Would you not consider this short sighted?

Until we elect the AAA and the dawn of mass nationalisation commences its pretty moot.

As I said, the bulk of electricity generated in Ireland is already by the government.... (around 70%)

You can lobby them to produce more.....

ShowMeTheCash

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Until we elect the AAA and the dawn of mass nationalisation commences its pretty moot.

As I said, the bulk of electricity generated in Ireland is already by the government.... (around 70%)

You can lobby them to produce more.....

Ireland does not make electricity we buy most of it in so I see a distinct difference, electricity comes at a cost to Ireland.

Wind energy minus costs should turn a profit and it will be generated locally.

ShowMeTheCash

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Until we elect the AAA and the dawn of mass nationalisation commences its pretty moot.

As I said, the bulk of electricity generated in Ireland is already by the government.... (around 70%)

You can lobby them to produce more.....

Sorry you are saying the 10% or so that is generated here 70% of that is government owned?

ShowMeTheCash

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Until we elect the AAA and the dawn of mass nationalisation commences its pretty moot.

As I said, the bulk of electricity generated in Ireland is already by the government.... (around 70%)

You can lobby them to produce more.....

Could you provide a link so what the government currently own?

BoJack Horseman

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Ireland does not make electricity we buy most of it in

prove that.

(because many readers have probably seen several power stations in their times)

Now, I'm looking at an SEAI report from 2014 where using information for 2013 places Ireland's electricity generation at the time at 4,382 kilo tonnes of oil equivelant (or Ktoe)...
Of which imported electricity amounted to 182 Ktoe or 4% or total.

ShowMeTheCash

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

prove that.

(because many readers have probably seen several power stations in their times)

Now, I'm looking at an SEAI report from 2014 where using information for 2013 places Ireland's electricity generation at the time at 4,382 kilo tonnes of oil equivelant (or Ktoe)...
Of which imported electricity amounted to 182 Ktoe or 4% or total.

Yeah where does the fuel come from to run the power stations?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Ireland

In "excess" of 80% of Ireland's energy needs are from imported fossil fuels, coal, gas and oil.

Water John

Farmers exploit a natural resource, so following your logic, the production from the land should be in the hands of Govn't. Been tried, in Russia and failed.

I see nothing wrong with local pop having an minority stake option in local turbines. Some type of investment vehicle with a stated return. Used in some European countries.
Don't be going with the big bad corporations stuff. Check IWEA website and see the owners, many Irish. Chompsky comes from a marxist perspective of analysis.
It is a high risk business, the cost of getting planning etc in Ireland can run a project over 10 years before if or its built.
If planning was zoned as per some other European countries where a developer knows he will get the permits to build in a specific area, then that is derisked and makes it easier to incorporate local investment.

BoJack Horseman

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

In "excess" of 80% of Ireland's energy needs are from imported fossil fuels, coal, gas and oil.

I never said that we didn't import fuel... you after all said 'electricity'!!
So, try harder there.

Again.... your argument boils down to demanding the government spend money on more power generation from renewables.

That is fine... no one is specifically against that argument.

However your fight will not be won here..... the readers don't decide government policy!

CIARAN_BOYLE

Here is the power plants owned by ESB, a government owned corporation.

https://www.esb.ie/our-businesses/generation-energy-trading-new/generation-asset-map

ShowMeTheCash

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

I never said that we didn't import fuel... you after all said 'electricity'!!
So, try harder there.

Again.... your argument boils down to demanding the government spend money on more power generation from renewables.

That is fine... no one is specifically against that argument.

However your fight will not be won here..... the readers don't decide government policy!

Right OK getting into semantics a little but I think we are in agreement, the energy is imported in some form or another.

I think wind energy is an opportunity Ireland needs to protect.
And I am not looking to win a fight with this thread, it was opened more to try and gather information.

ShowMeTheCash

Water John wrote: »

Farmers exploit a natural resource, so following your logic, the production from the land should be in the hands of Govn't. Been tried, in Russia and failed.

Following my logic? Bit of a jump... Although technically they are in the hands of the government, very few farms in Ireland turn much of a profit all farms rely on government subsidy.

Water John wrote: »

I see nothing wrong with local pop having an minority stake option in local turbines. Some type of investment vehicle with a stated return. Used in some European countries.

I agree this would be a good idea, some kind of cooperative.

Water John wrote: »

Don't be going with the big bad corporations stuff. Check IWEA website and see the owners, many Irish.

Just because they are Irish owners does not mean it is a good idea.
From what I have heard this model a lot of Irish owned corporations are hoping on is that they set up the turbines get them up and running then sell them on to a larger energy company.

Water John wrote: »

Chompsky comes from a marxist perspective of analysis.

Just because you might not agree with everything that someone like Chompsky might peddle does not mean he does not have a point when he is talking about TTIP or how corporations are maneuvering themselves to essentially be able to run a country into the ground.

Water John wrote: »

It is a high risk business, the cost of getting planning etc in Ireland can run a project over 10 years before if or its built.
If planning was zoned as per some other European countries where a developer knows he will get the permits to build in a specific area, then that is derisked and makes it easier to incorporate local investment.

I would disagree with high risk it's a smart business to get into.

Markcheese

ShowMeTheCash wrote:

I would disagree with high risk it's a smart business to get into.

Its very smart, once you're contracted,have planning and grid connection- can be very expensive and time consuming to get all three and no cigars for 2 out of 3...

Water John

Yes Mark, that is the key point.
Its no problem to risk 2/300K just to get to the starting line.

ShowMeTheCash

Water John wrote: »

Yes Mark, that is the key point.
Its no problem to risk 2/300K just to get to the starting line.

I need to find the information around this but I remember someone talking about this only a few weeks back on how many kw a turbine would normally produce per year. I think it was worked out based on the cost electric today that a single turbine could generate up to 800K to 1Mill in revenue per year.

Not bad if that is true!

CIARAN_BOYLE

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I need to find the information around this but I remember someone talking about this only a few weeks back on how many kw a turbine would normally produce per year. I think it was worked out based on the cost electric today that a single turbine could generate up to 800K to 1Mill in revenue per year.

Not bad if that is true!

Heres a case study regarding an investment. Income is €800K per year. Capital cost is €5.4 million.

Over a third of the investment came from small BES scheme investments, while most of the rest came from a bank loan.

http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&context=engscheleart2

ShowMeTheCash

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Heres a case study regarding an investment. Income is €800K per year. Capital cost is €5.4 million.

Over a third of the investment came from small BES scheme investments, while most of the rest came from a bank loan.

http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&context=engscheleart2

It's not bad.

Looking the the current market it says the interest on the loan would work out at 170K per year but no corporation tax is owned on the investment for the first 8 years which is a saving of 800K over the 8 years. (100k per year) you offset that against the loan its not bad terms.
Investment returned in 7 years.

Water John

That is a good project analysis.
The €800K is generated by 4 small turbines. Not sure are they any longer in the market.
The upfront risk cost and the time scale of getting to build in Ireland are ridiculous.
One is placing a big bet along with a lot of sweat and stress.

ShowMeTheCash

Water John wrote: »

That is a good project analysis.
The €800K is generated by 4 small turbines. Not sure are they any longer in the market.
The upfront risk cost and the time scale of getting to build in Ireland are ridiculous.
One is placing a big bet along with a lot of sweat and stress.

Well I agree and disagree.

Ireland works on the brown envelope scheme, I reckon with the right amount of money a developer could stick a wind turbine on top of Dublin spire if they wanted.

Planning authority needs to justify an application, personally I think large developers will eventually get their way, or at least that seems to be the way of it and I am not just talking turbines here.
Even when rejected it just means they keep trying until the bend the ear or pay off the correct person. If there is money to be made it will happen.

As for the upfront risk,what are the upfront risks?

I am not sure how these guys operate but I would think that most of the cost will only come after the planning has been granted?

Even if the buy a turbine/s the turbine is a company asset it could always be used either at a different location or sold if planning is refused.

End of the day its a 15% return business plan, the difficulty is securing the investment but the majority of the money is not spend until after planning I would of thought?

Water John

You are absolutely daft if you think a brown envelope sorts a Wind Turbine planning application.
Almost all end up at An Bord Pleanala. Some go on even to High Court.
No planner in a LA is going to risk not going by the book on it.

A Wind Farm of any size needs a full EIA and often other studies particular to the site.
Anybody setting out on what is a 10 year road at least would need a reserve of about €300,000.
That is a big bet and that is what it is.
The whole process is very difficult in Ireland.

ShowMeTheCash

Water John wrote: »

You are absolutely daft if you think a brown envelope sorts a Wind Turbine planning application.
Almost all end up at An Bord Pleanala. Some go on even to High Court.
No planner in a LA is going to risk not going by the book on it.

I do not think I am being that daft.
Ireland is all about knowing people in influence and has nothing to do with "doing it by the book!" Our government is literally corrupt and rotten to the core...
You do not have to go too far back to when Berti was trying to justify not having a bank account and look at the current Gardi fiasco...

But taking on board your point it may not be that a guy lands down to the planning office with a wad of cash but powerful people will simply talk with other powerful people and decisions get made behind closed doors.
Planning denied, planning denied, 10K gets donated to a community center or funds to some other local or community project in an area then planning is approved...

Water John wrote: »

A Wind Farm of any size needs a full EIA and often other studies particular to the site.
Anybody setting out on what is a 10 year road at least would need a reserve of about €300,000.
That is a big bet and that is what it is.
The whole process is very difficult in Ireland.

300K reserve on a business is a fairly small undertaking you would spend about the same buying bar or any small business.

I think the turbines out here in that part of Donegal have happened pretty quickly also.

Planning application was lodged in 2012.
Amended it in 2014 "Hub height".
Amended it in 2015 "Amendments to tip and hub height and diameter".

And those amendments where to make it larger the first plan was approved within 12 months.
First turbine is now up.

Seth Brundle

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I do not think I am being that daft.
Ireland is all about knowing people in influence and has nothing to do with "doing it by the book!" Our government is literally corrupt and rotten to the core...

Yet you want the same corrupt and rotten government to take control of the motor insurance market?

moleyv

Seems to know a lot about planning, yet said no locals were able to have input on the application...

Back to the bar with the wink and nod story telling...

Or ye could organise a community meeting at your newly built, wind turbine funded parish hall pleading ignorance and the Aarhus convention.

ShowMeTheCash

kbannon wrote: »

Yet you want the same corrupt and rotten government to take control of the motor insurance market?

Motor insurance?

But I am aware of the point I think you are trying to make.
And I agree it's catch 22!

That being said the Government should be putting people before profit, the corruption etc in our government is a separate issue.
A corporation is all about profit before people always!

Alternatively we look too community led or funded project or a nation wide cooperative.

But when it comes to certain fundamental utilities like electric and water we need a voice that outs people before profit.

Seth Brundle

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Motor insurance?

Getting my threads crossed, sorry.

Seth Brundle

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

That being said the Government should be putting people before profit, the corruption etc in our government is a separate issue.
A corporation is all about profit before people always!

Alternatively we look too community led or funded project or a nation wide cooperative.

But when it comes to certain fundamental utilities like electric and water we need a voice that outs people before profit.

When you say put people before profit, one could claim that by reducing the energy produced via fossil fuels and encouraging it through renewable sources, they are!

This doesn't suit your viewpoint however.

ShowMeTheCash

moleyv wrote: »

Seems to know a lot about planning, yet said no locals were able to have input on the application...

Back to the bar with the wink and nod story telling...

Or ye could organise a community meeting at your newly built, wind turbine funded parish hall pleading ignorance and the Aarhus convention.

As always I see you have something constructive to say.
You seem to struggle with what people actually post and perhaps what you think they are trying to say?
Maybe try read more assume less!

The locals did voice their concerns and the application was turned down twice it was turned down on for a number of reasons i.e. visual impact, environmental impact, access, impact to local residents.

No one said they where not able to have an input on the application.
The over turning of this decision by Bord Pleanala in Dublin was not an open forum the developer appealed the decision until someone in Dublin thought differently.

The gist of the appeal was more around the decisions made by the local authority where subjective no attempt to rectify the grounds in which they where refused.

The purpose of this thread was to gain information and thus far people have been helpful and provided links etc...

You are not being helpful you are simply trolling so while I go back to my pint and tell my stories why don't you go crawl back under your stone

ShowMeTheCash

kbannon wrote: »

When you say put people before profit, one could claim that by reducing the energy produced via fossil fuels and encouraging it through renewable sources, they are!

This doesn't suit your viewpoint however.

Does it not? What is my view point?
My issue is not with wind energy I think wind energy is a good idea.

But you seem to suggest that a good idea needs to be dominated by self-serving corporations.

I don't.

Moely in his attempt to hammer everything I said did say something interesting in his first post.
He said that wind turbines are erected based on topography.
Which is a little strange seeing that the developer in this case asked local farmers and land owners to attend a meeting if they are interested in leasing land.

It looks more like developers will erect turbines wherever they can get away with doing it which is probably the cheapest option for the corporation and not as Moely suggests.

moleyv

ShowMeTheCash wrote:

No one said they where not able to have an input on the application. The over turning of this decision by Bord Pleanala in Dublin was not an open forum the developer appealed the decision until someone in Dublin thought differently.

See below, anyone who made a submission to the application to the LA, can make a submission on the appeal. So you are incorrect.

If you didn't make a submission on the application to the LA, you didn't care enough.

The ability to make a submission on an application is enough to satisfy the Aarhus convention. No more developer consultation with 'the natives' is required. Whether it is beneficial to them is another story.

ShowMeTheCash wrote:

I do not know on what grounds, no information was provided. I know Donegal CC denied planning I think twice but it was over turned by board pleanala in Dublin. It has caused an upset as the decision simply got made without any further discussions with local residence.

ShowMeTheCash wrote:

Moely in his attempt to hammer everything I said did say something interesting in his first post. He said that wind turbines are erected based on topography. Which is a little strange seeing that the developer in this case asked local farmers and land owners to attend a meeting if they are interested in leasing land.

Not attempting to hammer everything you said. But throwing around accusations of corruption is wholely inappropriate.

Yes its related to topography, so think about that. Flat land can be suitable, if there is a funneling effect into that area due to the surrounding area or near the coast or if its just breezy at correct heights. Generally more 'suitable' land is on higher ground, although not mountainy.

Just on another points you made previously, yes, lots of the smaller companies sell on once built. As what happens in all types of development, retail, offices, commercial. If they make a profit on the construction costs, they can turn and burn again fast. Its cashflow. Like Irish life buying property.

And just on your 'profitability'. Turbines usually have a break in period. Testing different gearing etc, working out what is most efficient for each turbine. So add probably another year onto calc where it won't be working at full efficiency.

Also, just say a turbine is capable of 1MW, it doesn't mean if will actually have that output.

And someone said all turbines need an EIS, no they don't. If the entire development is under 5MW and/or fewer than 5 turbines, an EIS is not necessary, but the LA may deem it necessary.

I have provided you with plenty of information. I have much more. You have not effectively put your points across and blame me.

I've no problem with the government building turbines, as much as I have no issue with the private sector.

Community involved projects are becoming more common.

And no, I am not involved with a wind turbine developer.

moleyv

Also just something that came up recently.

Portugal ran off solely renewable energy for four days. Hydro, PV and wind.

The power lines were in private ownership. The government purchased them, and upgraded them to be more suitable for feed in from renewables.

They then concentrated on incentives for developers. As far as I know, the majority of turbines were private developments.

You can draw comparisons between Ireland and Portugal. Both huge wind potential. Both in monetary issues.

If Ireland could run off renewables for four days, I wouldn't care who built the turbines.

Its like toll roads and PPPs. If the state won't pay, I don't mind a private company making a profit over a number of years.

Water John

BTW a wind farm project like you mentioned would not have started in 2012.
They had to originally apply for grid and this would have been Gate 3 probably applied and paid for in 2003/4.

Its very diff to spend €300K on a going concern of a business, than to spend it over 10 years in the hope of things coming right without any income from it over that time. It is one hell of a bet in this country.

Seth Brundle

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Does it not? What is my view point?

I responded to your comment about governments. Was that comment of yours not actually your view?

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

But you seem to suggest that a good idea needs to be dominated by self-serving corporations.

I don't.

Like medicines and many other innovations? Yeah, in some cases private innovation is better than ill funded state projects.

unseenfootage

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Currently I think Ireland buys almost 90% of it's energy from the UK and elsewhere so I kind of understand private companies reselling the energy in the free market space it's not ours nor do we make it, but should private companies be allowed to harness a renewable and local energy source only to sell it back to the indigenous population purely for profit?

The 90 % energy that Ireland imports is mostly oil, gas, coal and some electricity.

ShowMeTheCash

moleyv wrote: »

See below, anyone who made a submission to the application to the LA, can make a submission on the appeal. So you are incorrect.

Incorrect?? Not sure what you mean.

moleyv wrote: »

If you didn't make a submission on the application to the LA, you didn't care enough.

You make these ridiculous statement that are just nonsense.
For my part I was not even aware of the original Turbine application, I only became aware there was an application after it was granted. Had nothing to do with not caring.

moleyv wrote: »

The ability to make a submission on an application is enough to satisfy the Aarhus convention. No more developer consultation with 'the natives' is required. Whether it is beneficial to them is another story.

So the explanation given as I understand it from the document was based on the argument put forward by the developer.
His argument was that the 3 main areas of refusal where due to subjective reasons. For example the visual effect on the landscape (maybe some people love looking at windmills), the environmental impact again could be down to an opinion.
Essentially the developer got a decision without changing anything or providing any new information but arguing against the original decision.

moleyv wrote: »

Not attempting to hammer everything you said. But throwing around accusations of corruption is wholely inappropriate.

Oh I see so I was throwing around accusations of corruption and you decided to jump all over it???

I think you need to go back and read what was originally posted.

I originally stated that the decision was over turned with little to no explanation much to the dismay of local residence.

I think what you are referring to was a general comment I made with Water John on how Ireland operates "the brown envelope scheme" is this what you a referring to?
This was not a specific accusation more statement of how this country operates.
I think very few would disagree this kind of thing happens:

But do not take my word for it:

http://www.thejournal.ie/the-9-worst-councils-in-irelands-planning-system-418903-Apr2012/

This was 2012

Here is a report from the above article:
http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2012/04/20120416StateoftheNation_PlanningSystem.pdf

And here is an interesting quote from said report

"An Taisce's experience in taking appeals such as those described above is that the practice of ‘rate chasing’ and the lure of lucrative capital contribution levies together with low level cronyism and the promise of 'hundreds of jobs with no thought to employment displacement are powerful corrupting factors in determining planning applications which in many instances override proper planning considerations."

Cronyism and corrupting factor within the planning authority?? Really?

moleyv wrote: »

Yes its related to topography, so think about that. Flat land can be suitable, if there is a funneling effect into that area due to the surrounding area or near the coast or if its just breezy at correct heights. Generally more 'suitable' land is on higher ground, although not mountainy.

Let me help you out as I am not even sure what you are attempting here.
All of Donegal is windy the entire county is on the north Atlantic cost.

moleyv wrote: »

Just on another points you made previously, yes, lots of the smaller companies sell on once built. As what happens in all types of development, retail, offices, commercial. If they make a profit on the construction costs, they can turn and burn again fast. Its cashflow. Like Irish life buying property.

Are you making a point? Or just reiterating what I already said?

moleyv wrote: »

And just on your 'profitability'. Turbines usually have a break in period. Testing different gearing etc, working out what is most efficient for each turbine. So add probably another year onto calc where it won't be working at full efficiency.

Was not 'my' profitability study it was carried out by Dublin Institute of Technologies so you can take it up with them I am sure you know better.
I even rounded up they had it at 6.7 years I said 7.

moleyv wrote: »

Also, just say a turbine is capable of 1MW, it doesn't mean if will actually have that output.

Again take it up with DIT it was their report, it was not even me who provided it I just comment on it.

But as we are grasping at straws let me do the same the efficiency of turbines are only getting better, the technology is getting better as is the software.
I could argue based on the report that early turbines that took a 20 year operating time to return the initial capital which is now been reduced to 6.7 years, it suggests that this time will only be further reduced going forward, a counter argument to what you are suggesting.

moleyv wrote: »

And someone said all turbines need an EIS, no they don't. If the entire development is under 5MW and/or fewer than 5 turbines, an EIS is not necessary, but the LA may deem it necessary.

I have provided you with plenty of information. I have much more. You have not effectively put your points across and blame me.

I do not blame you for anything, I came on looking for information, you came on gave some smart comments about me educating myself.
I think you are mixing up giving you opinion and giving information.
If you have information provide a link simply stating something is not a good source of information. Like above on the EIS if this is true then show where you got this information, provide a link or a source.

moleyv wrote: »

I've no problem with the government building turbines, as much as I have no issue with the private sector.

Community involved projects are becoming more common.

And no, I am not involved with a wind turbine developer.

The report I reference above, have a read, I think this country has already gotten itself into enough trouble buy letting developers call the shots.
There needs to be a balance I do not see a balance, I see the same things happen over and over again buy the time people lift there heads and say "wait a second how did we let this happen" usually it is already too late.

Community involved projects I think are a good idea, if our government wasn't such a fleet or ##### then a government led project I think too would be a good idea. Private sector in this space I think needs to be handled very carefully.

ShowMeTheCash

moleyv wrote: »

Also just something that came up recently.

Portugal ran off solely renewable energy for four days. Hydro, PV and wind.

The power lines were in private ownership. The government purchased them, and upgraded them to be more suitable for feed in from renewables.

They then concentrated on incentives for developers. As far as I know, the majority of turbines were private developments.

You can draw comparisons between Ireland and Portugal. Both huge wind potential. Both in monetary issues.

If Ireland could run off renewables for four days, I wouldn't care who built the turbines.

Its like toll roads and PPPs. If the state won't pay, I don't mind a private company making a profit over a number of years.

This is why I added the video that talks about the Atlantic trade agreement that our government wants to sign up to cannot remember the correct name off hand.
In short a corporation could sue the state if the state decides to try and take something back it's something that perhaps the oil corporation might use if a government tried to change the details of an agreement like we have done, the same however could happen with energy companies.

You mention the tolls, I remember reading that the money recouped for the M50 paid for the road X amount of years ago but a private corporation continue to make money from it.

How much of a profit should they make?
You miss a toll you get a 3 euro fine if not paid in 14 days I think it works out at 41 euro and then it jumps to 103 euro after 30days.

Yeah that was an awesome idea!