Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Nimbyism: Windfarm off South County Dublin

Options
1…5681011

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,524 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Gaoth Laidir wrote: »
    And why can't you share the data?
    Because I don’t own the data. It’s being paid for my someone other than me or you.


  • Options
    #213
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,524 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Markcheese wrote: »
    How many wind surfers and kite surfers are gonna be that far out ,
    I accept that there may be some turbulence , but at distance ?
    I never seen a sheep or cows blown into the skys or knocked over by wind turbines ,

    Don’t feed the trolls , don’t feed the trolls ....


  • Options
    #214
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    beauf wrote: »
    Drive in...

    But the screen in drive ins are very big if a sombrero was blocking you chances are that your mans car would the problem.


  • Options
    #215
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    beauf wrote: »
    Common sense doesn't seem to work either.

    Actually we are talking about the location of wind farms. You decided that objecting to the location of a wind farm was the same as objecting to any form of clean energy.

    If you could see the pollution you'd have a very different view I think. and the correct term is cleaner energy, there is no such things clean energy unless you look at fusion.


  • Options
    #216
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    If you could see the pollution you'd have a very different view I think. and the correct term is cleaner energy, there is no such things clean energy unless you look at fusion.

    It doesn't seem to impossible that someone could be in favour of wind farms and still want it in a different location.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    beauf wrote: »
    It doesn't seem to impossible that someone could be in favour of wind farms and still want it in a different location.

    Hence the term NIMBY


  • Options
    #218
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    Hence the term NIMBY

    Neither this location or Cliffs of Moher are in my back yard and I wouldn't want it in either location, or the great barrier reef, also not my back yard. Or the Rock of Cashel.

    NIMBY is a lazy argument down to justify poor decision making and/or planning, and fast track some project so its past the point of return before the folly is fully realized.


  • Options
    #219
    Gaoth Laidir
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    beauf wrote: »
    Neither this location or Cliffs of Moher are in my back yard and I wouldn't want it in either location, or the great barrier reef, also not my back yard. Or the Rock of Cashel.

    NIMBY is a lazy argument down to justify poor decision making and/or planning, and fast track some project so its past the point of return before the folly is fully realized.

    So by that rationale, there should be no windfarms...anywhere. There will always be someone to object to a location that you think is suitable.

    Nimbyism is alive and well in Ireland. Like in people buying houses under flight paths to Dublin and Weston Airports, both of which were there long before the houses were built. Thick gombeens.


  • Options
    #220
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    beauf wrote: »
    Neither this location or Cliffs of Moher are in my back yard and I wouldn't want it in either location, or the great barrier reef, also not my back yard. Or the Rock of Cashel.

    NIMBY is a lazy argument down to justify poor decision making and/or planning, and fast track some project so its past the point of return before the folly is fully realized.

    NIMBY means Not in my back yard
    Why are you against this project
    It may be news to you but the giant coal transport ships from China sail through the barrier reef.


  • Options
    #221
    gourcuff
    Registered Users Posts: 295 ✭✭gourcuff


    The view is not protected, either in the development plan or other planning policy, its clearly not that important, if it was it would be designated.

    This project will be great, renewable energy close to the biggest demand source makes sense, it means less distribution involved, farm to market as it were...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,524 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    Hence the term NIMBY

    What’s your point? No one is saying otherwise. I think most people are in favour of them but just in a more appropriate locations.

    Do you think the calling someone a NIMBY let’s you build whatever you want. If people don’t take an interest on looking after their own backyard who would ?


  • Options
    #223
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,524 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

    Nimbyism is alive and well in Ireland. Like in people buying houses under flight paths to Dublin and Weston Airports, both of which were there long before the houses were built. Thick gombeens.

    Except in this case the houses are here first. So that would make the developer a thick gombeen?


  • Options
    #224
    Gaoth Laidir
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    ted1 wrote: »
    Except in this case the houses are here first. So that would make the developer a thick gombeen?

    There's not much point trying to argue with you. Comparing a house under a flight path to a house 10 km from a silent wind farm is almost as ridiculous as this mystery modelling data you made up earlier. You clearly don't understand much about how these things work, which is strange, as you claim to work in the industry.


  • Options
    #225
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Gaoth Laidir wrote: »
    So by that rationale, there should be no windfarms...anywhere. There will always be someone to object to a location that you think is suitable.

    Nimbyism is alive and well in Ireland. Like in people buying houses under flight paths to Dublin and Weston Airports, both of which were there long before the houses were built. Thick gombeens.

    Weston was a grass airfield until the 1980s. Lots of houses there already by then. The Big Terminal was only built in 2005. They tried to turn it into an mini Airport after the houses were there.


  • Options
    #226
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Gaoth Laidir wrote: »
    T... Comparing a house under a flight path to a house 10 km from a silent wind farm is almost as ridiculous a...

    ...who introduced flight paths to this thread?...

    Whats the relevance of it being silent?


  • Options
    #227
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,339 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    beauf wrote: »
    Neither this location or Cliffs of Moher are in my back yard and I wouldn't want it in either location, or the great barrier reef, also not my back yard. Or the Rock of Cashel.

    NIMBY is a lazy argument down to justify poor decision making and/or planning, and fast track some project so its past the point of return before the folly is fully realized.

    You're comparing the Cliffs of Moher and Rock of Cashel to what now...?


  • Options
    #228
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    NIMBY means Not in my back yard
    Why are you against this project
    It may be news to you but the giant coal transport ships from China sail through the barrier reef.

    Thats working out well.

    https://www.marineconservation.org.au/dredging-shipping-great-barrier-reef/


  • Options
    #229
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    You're comparing the Cliffs of Moher and Rock of Cashel to what now...?

    I didn't compare them to anything. I just said I wouldn't want a wind farm there. Its got nothing to do with Nimbyism.


  • Options
    #230
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    beauf wrote: »
    Thats working out well.

    https://www.marineconservation.org.au/dredging-shipping-great-barrier-reef/

    Not for the barrier reef it’s not


  • Options
    #231
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    ted1 wrote: »
    What’s your point? No one is saying otherwise. I think most people are in favour of them but just in a more appropriate locations.

    Do you think the calling someone a NIMBY let’s you build whatever you want. If people don’t take an interest on looking after their own backyard who would ?

    Any other location as long as it’s not within your line of sight you mean.

    I never called anyone anything and anyway a person can’t be labelled a NIMBY as it an acronym like NASA or NPHET.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    Not for the barrier reef it’s not

    That was my point.


  • Options
    #233
    Gaoth Laidir
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    beauf wrote: »
    Weston was a grass airfield until the 1980s. Lots of houses there already by then. The Big Terminal was only built in 2005. They tried to turn it into an mini Airport after the houses were there.
    beauf wrote: »
    ...who introduced flight paths to this thread?...

    Whats the relevance of it being silent?

    It's another example of NIMBYism.

    Weston's always been a busy airfield, and has been the second busiest in Ireland, in fact, based on aircraft movements. The residents are not complaining only about the very limited jet traffic but also the small training aircraft. I fly out of there and there are very strict noise-abatement procedures to follow nowadays, but they're still not happy. They're not quite sure what they're not happy about, just that they don't want it in their area.


  • Options
    #234
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    Any other location as long as it’s not within your line of sight you mean.

    I never called anyone anything and anyway a person can’t be labelled a NIMBY as it an acronym like NASA or NPHET.

    No it's about putting them in areas of significant visual quality.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/scenicsolutions.world/visual-impacts/%3famp

    Its not like there there is no choice other than this location. You could move it very little and not have an issue.


  • Options
    #235
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Gaoth Laidir wrote: »
    It's another example of NIMBYism.

    Weston's always been a busy airfield, and has been the second busiest in Ireland, in fact, based on aircraft movements. The residents are not complaining only about the very limited jet traffic but also the small training aircraft. I fly out of there and there are very strict noise-abatement procedures to follow nowadays, but they're still not happy. They're not quite sure what they're not happy about, just that they don't want it in their area.

    I used to be out there in the 80s and 90s and it was a fraction of the size it is now. Basically a club house and a hanger or two. Hadn't changed much since the 60s. Since then it's been expanded massively and turned into a mini airport. It's unrecognisable from what it was. They tried to ramp up commercial actively massively.

    If they have conflict with locals they mostly created it themselves. They wanted to create a hub for Dublin airport in the suburbs. They thought they would print money with the place. Turned it from a club airfield into a private jet and helicopter airport.

    But yeah every issue is NIMBYism.


  • Options
    #236
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,524 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Gaoth Laidir wrote: »
    There's not much point trying to argue with you. Comparing a house under a flight path to a house 10 km from a silent wind farm is almost as ridiculous as this mystery modelling data you made up earlier. You clearly don't understand much about how these things work, which is strange, as you claim to work in the industry.

    Hang you made that a comparison that was the exact opposite to what is actually happening. You bought up flight paths. I’ve no issue with flight paths. When the main runway is out of action in Dublin. I’m under one. As they come in over killiney.


    I made up no mystery modelling. I understand exactly how they work.


  • Options
    #237
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    Object to wind farms that disturb the view but be happy to breath in tonnes of NOX, sulphur, and particulates that burn your lungs and destroy your DNA. Good one!

    Wind power requires back up from conventional power plants so your point makes no sense in reality:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #238
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,826 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Wind power requires back up from conventional power plants so your point makes no sense in reality:rolleyes:

    In fairness though, there is no doubt that this site will massively reduce fossil fuel electricity here.

    Even with a stand by plant or plants.


  • Options
    #239
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Gaoth Laidir wrote: »
    You didn't hear the reason? It was very clearly stated that the reason is because of the shallow waters there. A secondary reason is efficiency and cost, with reduced cabling and hence power losses.

    Both of these were clearly stated by the same contractor that you earlier told me acknowledges that the turbines will be visible. Maybe some selective hearing going on, no?

    These "shallow waters" are prime feeding areas for protected seabirds


  • Options
    #240
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Danzy wrote: »
    In fairness though, there is no doubt that this site will massively reduce fossil fuel electricity here.

    Even with a stand by plant or plants.

    It hasn't significantly in the likes Germany in terms of % of coal used in power generation over the last 20years. Also the life-span of offshore wind turbines is much reduced and then there is the amount of emissions linked to their production and installation.

    https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts

    Just to note on the above link in terms of wind energy - "installed capacity" means what a wind farm produces under "perfect" wind conditions ie. constant 30mph. Actually output is obviously only a fraction of that given day to day wind variations. Which is why coal use there is still high.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Wind power requires back up from conventional power plants so your point makes no sense in reality:rolleyes:

    Currently they do. My point was people don’t want to see these things and so they kick up a fuss but perhaps if they kicked up the same fuss about things that will have an actual an effect on the lives, like Dublins air quality regularly being worse then Beijing’s the country would be better off


Advertisement