"Green" policies are destroying this country

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380375#Comment_119380375

yes there is of course support for nuclear here, including from myself, but again, announce the building of a reactor, and see what happens, again, the anti brigade is far far greater than us greenies!

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380390#Comment_119380390

I keep hearing this about costs tumbling and time never being better for going into debt, but nobody seems to actually know how many off these offshore wind turbines will be required, or how much this will cost. With interest rates rising, and predicted to rise further, this may not be such a great time to get into further debt. Especially when nobody seems to have a clue as to how much borrowing would be required for an energy source that has already shown how unreliable it is.

The only interconnector in the mix we can look to for help is the French one, which is 5 years away (planning permission was only given 2 months ago) and irony of ironies will be supplying nuclear energy, with no guarantee that France will have a surplus or have it when we actually need it. Any government with an ounce of sense would first invest in having energy security, rather than crossing fingers hoping on an interconnector that is at least 5 years down the line for salvation.

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119378999#Comment_119378999

They are much colder in winter and much warmer in summer, typically.

Our average temperature is flatter.

We are also on the right side of the Atlantic and have a massive tech presence.

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380336#Comment_119380336

Nobody wants a wind turbine in their back garden either. For a group so keen on them, neither do greens unless it is somebody else`s back garden and that hasn`t stopped them being built.

As that survey shows, attitudes in Ireland have changed on nuclear. Especially among the 18 -24 age group that make up the largest percentage of Green Party supporters compared to any other age group, with 60% in favour of nuclear.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380481#Comment_119380481

government can currently borrow at 2% fixed, i.e. plough on!

east-west interconnect already supplying nuclear power, i.e. plough on!

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380515#Comment_119380515

Currently being the operative word. Interests are going up and will continue to do so. But even if they were not, any government borrowing will have to be paid back by the taxpayer. Do you not think they have a right to know how much this borrowing is going to be before it is embarked on ?

Indeed it is via that east-west interconnector, which shows the gross hypocrisy of green`s. "Terrible stuff that nuclear, but shur it`s grand if somebody else is doing the lifting". I mentioned energy security, if you think that interconnector is energy secure then you may need to take another look at that.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380560#Comment_119380560

yup, but the fixed rate was actually 2.5% only a few weeks ago, and now its 2%, so, plough on, right now!

yes, a serious study would need to be done in order to estimate how much borrowing would need to be done, and id imagine it would be eye watering figures of multiples of billions, i also have a feeling, if investment is not done quickly, our current problems wont be resolved anytime soon! i.e. its either invest to try resolve them, or not, and face almost certain serious sh1t!

...once again, at current rates, it would be possible to have these debts paid back within a few years of operations, and at the end of it, a whole new set of state assets would be created, giving us more to be able to help resolve our other state issues, housing, health care, etc etc, i.e. these new assets could be placed into sovereign wealth funds etc etc, to do so.....

again, our anti nuclear stances is not just coming from us greenies, its a widescale societal problem....

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380509#Comment_119380509

But who will pay for it?

The maths are what kills nuclear.

If it made financial sense they would thrive, not be 50 years past their heyday.

I think they should be kept open where they already are.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380684#Comment_119380684

we will all have to pay for it, cause by not investing, we ll be paying far more for it.....

France has amongst the lowest energy prices in europe, nuclear works, but.....

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380702#Comment_119380702

France covers the cost and does so for strategic reasons, for pride, to keep the massive number of jobs in the sector.

Nuclear power may well have some future in Europe as a provider of bulk electricity for strategic reasons. Maybe the ECB could directly fund it.

It certainly has a Green argument on Carbon.

On cost it lost the argument years ago and that's getting worse and it is also losing the argument on time to completion.

It has an argument as part of a wider diverse energy source for strategic reasons.

Nuclear never really lived up to its potential. In generations to come it may but that is probably not for decades or longer, if ever.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380760#Comment_119380760

ah i somewhat disagree there, i think countries such as france have shown its success, but its very true, the initial setup costs are off the walls, compared to alternatives, and i truly believe, its currently impossible to create a nuclear industry in ireland, due to the widescale social refusal to do so, and of course due to these initial costs

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119379691#Comment_119379691

But the grid does and will for the foreseeable future-depend on fossil fuels foreign or otherwise, until green hydrogen is a proven commodity- if it ever becomes such.

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380684#Comment_119380684

If anything the maths favour nuclear.

Germany has invested 150 Billion to date in renewables according to Forbes,, has 40% of their electrical input from them and have the 3rd highest priced electricity in Europe (we are 4th. highest), and are now back burning coal, exploring for oil and gas and building and leasing LNG terminals.

France has 70% of their electricity supply from nuclear, are the largest exporters of electricity in the E.U., are planning on building more nuclear plants, and their electricity charges are 50% less than Germany

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380609#Comment_119380609

A rough rule of thumb based on our population and Germany on cost of renewables to date would have us already spending 10 Billion. Based on that even if turbines offshore cost the same as those onshore (and that is highly unlikely) would cost another 30 Billion. That is a total of 40 Billion where we do not even know what the interest rate would be, so I don`t see where you see these debts paid back within a few years are coming from. Especially when renewables haven`t reduced our electricity bills by a red cent.

That is not even taking into account that the lifetime of wind turbines onshore is 20-25 years, and most likely much less for those offshore, so rather than a whole new set of assets, you are looking at a constant expensive replacement of those asset. For 40 Billion based on them operating for 25 years, that is 1.6 Billion year on year plus the interest charges on the original investment, which even at 2% brings that total for year on year up to 2.6 Billion.

Green warriors may have an anti-nuclear stance, but as I have shown you that is not shared by the population where there is a 50-50 split, with the age group of those who were the largest percentage voting demographic to vote green in 2020 are 60% in favour of nuclear.

Pa ElGrande

RTE are gas lighting the public. She doesn't even question George Monbiot aka "Moonbat" on the basis for his claims.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSF7KdHe828

Darth Putin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380164#Comment_119380164

Offer free electric bills to locals and have parishes fight it out

Darth Putin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119381266#Comment_119381266

Try closer to a trillion for Germany

https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/germany-needs-invest-1-trillion-hit-climate-target-2021-10-21/

with about same left to spend

French spent 250b on nuclear inflation adjusted up to now

xxxxxxl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380278#Comment_119380278

Would not say that. Apparently they have a way of building stuff on gov owned land now. No ABP needed.

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380350#Comment_119380350

Capacity factor is the Maximum capacity versus the total energy actually generated

This is one way of measuring it, but with wind, the maximum capacity is not the expected capacity. Just like capacity factor for Solar can never be more than 50% because it's dark half the time, but it doesn't mean solar isn't a really important part of the energy mix.

With Nuclear, the 'capacity factor' should be close to 100%

The grid is complex

Mecanudo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119381538#Comment_119381538

The guys a fooking lunatic. Unfortunately he gets quoted verbatim by others as if what he says is gospel. Its not. His science is almost totally based on alarmist and pseudo scientific quackery. That RTE actually had him on beggers belief.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380481#Comment_119380481

The redicolousness of using this argument when you are quite happy to consider spending 10's of billions (the obvious front loaded costs - not the multiple long term hidden costs) on a single Nuclear power plant which would not put a watt onto the grid for at least a decade. Disingenuous is the word that springs to mind.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380268#Comment_119380268

I visited cork a few times and Wexford and mayo. Had a grand old time in lockdown.

xxxxxxl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119382702#Comment_119382702

Hope not against regulations. That would be selfish. I spent most of 2 years going from my local shop back to home the extent of my travels. My google maps is actually funny to look at.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119382875#Comment_119382875

All perfectly legal.

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119381266#Comment_119381266

France subsidise and regulate the cost of electricity to consumers. Germany and Ireland do the opposite

Darth Putin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119383432#Comment_119383432

And yet French consumers pay 2-3x less for electricity than Ireland and Germany and produce 3-5x less co2

Imagine that! Solving climate change using science and technology AND not bankrupting population

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119382480#Comment_119382480

George Monbiot's record on environmentalism.... lets put it this way, if we had taken his stance on most things, we'd be in a much better place right now.

If we had started transitioning seriously 20 years ago, (globally, if we hadn't allowed climate change deniers to control the narrative for so long) we'd already be very close to being free from our reliance on fossil fuels and instead of being committed to 2c of warming, we'd still be in a realistic position to limit warming to 1.5c

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119380481#Comment_119380481

The Celtic Interconnector project is supposed to be complete by 2026 according to their own timeline, the UK are starting a new Interconnector project with Europe to sell their excess power to the EU (generated by wind power in Scotland)

The EU grid is massive and very well interconnected so there is very little Ireland can do to improve our energy security more, than complete interconnectors to our neighbours.

The Celtic interconnector should have been more ambitious (higher capacity) but it will be easier to upgrade than to build from scratch

In terms of energy security, you keep two different sets of books on your mental balance sheet. One set for green projects where everything is years away and expensive and unreliable, and the other set for fossil fuels and nuclear, where it can all be magically constructed instantaneously for half nothing and with world beating reliability..

In reality, all infrastructure projects are expensive, they all take time, and they all have some elements of unreliability.

Anything that we start to plan now, won't be finished by 2026/2027 at the earliest, so all the whinging about gas being unreliable now is pointless because we can't do anything about it within the timeframe of this ongoing Ukranian conflict. So we should be planning now for the infrastructure that we need post 2030, and that's low carbon, sustainable and not reliant on fossil fuels. And we can keep our existing gas turbines running until we can complete the new infrastructure that will replace it.

cute geoge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119383754#Comment_119383754

The problem is their is nothing viable to replace gas only nuclear

paddyisreal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119383657#Comment_119383657

Transition exactly to what 20 years ago ? Wind, solar, hydro please clarify as the technology doesn't exist now for a smooth transition without fossil fuels or nuclear so what you say above is bullshit