Nimbyism: Windfarm off South County Dublin

Birdnuts

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

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

My problem with wind farms has little to do with "how they look" - its founded on their economic and environmental impact. I also despise "Greenwash" which wind power is a prime example of

ted1

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

like Dublins air quality regularly being worse then Beijing’s the country would be better off

That’s a big claim any link to data? I wouldn’t expect any truth in that bar a gorse fire upwind of a sensor

Gaoth Laidir

ted1 wrote: »

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.

I've no doubt that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of the types of downwind effects that you claim could affect Dublin. None whatsoever. I've already asked what these effects are but you've yet to come up with a realistic answer.

You said the tip spins at 200 kph. That depends on the windspeed, spinning faster on a windier day. However, stronger winds dissipate turbulent eddies much more quickly than calmer winds. So on a windy day, wake vortices will mix out and dissipate within a short distance of the turbines. In this case, you wont be getting small craft out there anyway, so your statement on sailors' valid concerns does not hold up.

On a calmer day, with a more stable boundary layer, this dissipation takes longer, but the turbulence itself in this case is greatly reduced anyway because of the slower windspeed. The vortices will be minimal. Again, whatever way you cut it, a windfarm 10 km out to sea will have no effect on land or small craft between it and the land.

So yes, you made it up.

Birdnuts

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Again, whatever way you cut it, a windfarm 10 km out to sea will have no effect on land or small craft between it and the land.

So yes, you made it up.

10km is nothing given the size of the turbines proposed - in other EU countries the minimum distance from land for such developments is 30km.

lalababa

It boggles the auld brain that we can't put up a few turbines fer de auld green electric, when otherwise we're burning oil and putting out carcigens and buggering up de ozone and God knows what else. But sure 'xyz'

Larbre34

Lads its not an arbitrary decision. The Kish bank is where it is, the array either goes on it or it doesn't go anywhere, end of.

Banana Republic 1

Birdnuts wrote: »

My problem with wind farms has little to do with "how they look" - its founded on their economic and environmental impact. I also despise "Greenwash" which wind power is a prime example of

List the environmental and economic impacts.
Explain why wind power is a prime example of greenwash.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

Lads its not an arbitrary decision. The Kish bank is where it is, the array either goes on it or it doesn't go anywhere, end of.

Or the company invest in a wind farm elsewhere. I’d call it arbitrary

ted1

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Again, whatever way you cut it, a windfarm 10 km out to sea will have no effect on land or small craft between it and the land.

So yes, you made it up.

I’m going to have discredit you and your complex that thinks you know all.

“

The authors note that turbine wakes have been observed to extend 25 miles or more for both onshore and offshore wind farms.
“
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.greentechmedia.com/amp/article/wake-effects-cost-downwind-wind-farm-millions

https://www.colorado.edu/rasei/sites/default/files/attached-files/big_energy_series-lundquist.pdf

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-018-0281-2?WT.feed_name=subjects_business-and-commerce

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/12/181218115124.htm

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/753/3/032020/pdf
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10546-019-00473-0

Birdnuts

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

List the environmental and economic impacts.
Explain why wind power is a prime example of greenwash.

I've posted serval examples already in this thread:rolleyes: - and the latest example is a major bog slide and pollution incident on a wind farm construction site in Donegal in the last 24 hrs. Locals and groups like the Golden Eagle Trust tried to stop this destructive project but once again the planners failed to uphold basic EU directives on the protection of birds/habitats or learn lessons from the Derrybrein disaster

https://www.facebook.com/GweebarraG/

Birdnuts

lalababa wrote: »

It boggles the auld brain that we can't put up a few turbines fer de auld green electric, when otherwise we're burning oil and putting out carcigens and buggering up de ozone and God knows what else. But sure 'xyz'

Great insight - you must be the genius designing energy policy for this government:rolleyes:

Gaoth Laidir

ted1 wrote: »

I’m going to have discredit you and your complex that thinks you know all.

“

The authors note that turbine wakes have been observed to extend 25 miles or more for both onshore and offshore wind farms.
“
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.greentechmedia.com/amp/article/wake-effects-cost-downwind-wind-farm-millions

https://www.colorado.edu/rasei/sites/default/files/attached-files/big_energy_series-lundquist.pdf

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-018-0281-2?WT.feed_name=subjects_business-and-commerce

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/12/181218115124.htm

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/753/3/032020/pdf
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10546-019-00473-0

None of those disagrees with what I was saying. They all confirm the fact that wake effects decrease downstream, with the most turbulent wake only within 2-4 blade diameters of the tower. That Texas farm was only 300 metres downstream of another one.

Only in the most stable and calmest boundary layer conditions does the wake extend several miles, but as I said, in this case it's not perceivable to anybody anyway and only becomes noticeable as a tiny reduction in wind energy averaged over a long timescale. The actual occurrence of such conditions (not only an easterly wind but also an extremely stabily stratified boundary layer) in Dublin would be a tiny fraction, given the wind rose I posted earlier.

So you've still to provide any evidence to prove that the Kish farm would cause and harmful effects downstream and would be a valid reason not to build it.

Banana Republic 1

ted1 wrote: »

No we won't. well not until we get BESS added in the design. We need to diversify our RES. Wind is not dispatachable

Solar, Biomass, hydrogen, etc

The future of energy production for the grid is Nuclear and Solar. Biomass is unsustainable because it takes away land that could be used for food production and it relies to heavily on fertilisers which use oil in it manufacture.

Hydrogen is still some way off but when it does happen will change things.

Banana Republic 1

ted1 wrote: »

It looks horrible, could be put out further to sea but that’ll cost more money. It’ll take away the view with no benefit to those that enjoy it.

As for the green element that’s not an argument as it can be placed somewhere less intrusive

Nimbyism?

ganmo

Does anyone know who to talk to about starting the planning process for a wind farm in the dublin mountains?

Gaoth Laidir

ganmo wrote: »

Does anyone know who to talk to about starting the planning process for a wind farm in the dublin mountains?

You couldn't have one there as the wake from it could topple Liberty Hall...

Banana Republic 1

ted1 wrote: »

That’s a big claim any link to data? I wouldn’t expect any truth in that bar a gorse fire upwind of a sensor

Data doesn't matter to spoofoligists

ted1

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

The future of energy production for the grid is Nuclear.

I have no problem with Nuclear, however it won’t play any part. The lead time is to long and we’ll have all we energy we need with BESS and possible hydrogen.

If we start a landing designing and building a nuclear plant you’d be looking at 2050 go live

Banana Republic 1

Birdnuts wrote: »

Oil and gas prices are currently a fraction of what they were in 2007 - and yet the cost of power here and in the likes of Germany has increased massively since. They one common strand?? Yep, adding wind energy to the grid, supported by folks who can't tell greenwash from the real thing

Germany has droped nuclear power and is instead mining lignite also called brown coal which has less energy in it the wood hence the cost increase. Come up with something more then fake news bird.

ted1

ganmo wrote: »

Does anyone know who to talk to about starting the planning process for a wind farm in the dublin mountains?

You need to talk to Eirgrid about a grid connection, but I believe the gate is closed and you missed the boat. There’s a long line in front of you. And PV will take preference next year

Banana Republic 1

Birdnuts wrote: »

I've posted serval examples already in this thread:rolleyes: - and the latest example is a major bog slide and pollution incident on a wind farm construction site in Donegal in the last 24 hrs. Locals and groups like the Golden Eagle Trust tried to stop this destructive project but once again the planners failed to uphold basic EU directives on the protection of birds/habitats or learn lessons from the Derrybrein disaster

https://www.facebook.com/GweebarraG/

Ive been looking at your thread post bird and I afraid you've been caught spoofing.

ted1

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

Nimbyism?

Point?

Gaoth Laidir

Birdnuts wrote: »

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

Is the Kish Bank a protected area?

sameoldname

I live 40km from Dublin in the middle of nowhere but at night I can see the tv mast navigation lights on Kippure from my bedroom window. I wonder can I sue RTE for taking away from the enjoyment of my home? /s

ted1

sameoldname wrote: »

I live 40km from Dublin in the middle of nowhere but at night I can see the tv mast navigation lights on Kippure from my bedroom window. I wonder can I sue RTE for taking away from the enjoyment of my home? /s

No one is talking about suing. That mast has to go there to operate. The wind turbines don’t.

ganmo

ted1 wrote: »

You need to talk to Eirgrid about a grid connection, but I believe the gate is closed and you missed the boat. There’s a long line in front of you. And PV will take preference next year

Would they even entertain a small wind farm without before it gets pp?

sameoldname

ted1 wrote: »

No one is talking about suing. That mast has to go there to operate. The wind turbines don’t.

It absolutely doesn't. There are other mountain tops overlooking Dublin or they could have built towers like they did in London.

ganmo

ted1 wrote: »

No one is talking about suing. That mast has to go there to operate. The wind turbines don’t.

Rte added height to the three rock mast about 5 years ago and applied for retention for it after.
One rule for the big boys

ganmo

sameoldname wrote: »

It absolutely doesn't. There are other mountain tops overlooking Dublin or they could have built towers like they did in London.

Rte send the signal to three rock then onto kippure and from there to most of the country

sameoldname

ganmo wrote: »

Rte send the signal to three rock then onto kippure and from there to most of the country

Much like a windfarm 10km off the Dublin coast will feed power to the rest of the country?