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

"Green" policies are destroying this country

Options
17157167187207211067

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    That is quite funny from someone who is on here day and night so busy posting Green Party propaganda he often cannot find the time to check the facts first.

    That may have been keeping you so busy that you haven`t noticed the title of this thread. It`s "green policies are destroying this country, so what do you expect I should be posting here other than posts in relation to the Green Party and Ryan. The results of the GAA intercounty U20 football matches ?

    Btw, a cracking U20 Connact fnal in Tuam this evening, but you were probably to busy manning the trenches to notice.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    More of a rugby man myself

    Anywho, while this has been mildly entertaining it's getting old, again, so I'll be leaving you to enjoy your latest loop




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,607 ✭✭✭ps200306


    That is price hedging / arbitrage. It's got nothing to do with the security of supply issue.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    It definitely does. The main security of supply concern is at the Western European level, not at the Ireland level.

    Britain going Mad Max and stealing gas that is supposed to go to Ireland is not likely. The only way it could even be contemplated as an option would be if there was a shortage across Western Europe.

    But there isn’t and won’t be because there is now plenty LNG import capacity.

    if there is a shortage of LNG or tankers then an LNG terminal isn’t going to be any help to us viz security of supply.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Just over a year ago had you mentioned to Germany that they would now be building and leasing LNG terminals because their whole transition policy would be in tatters due to no gas from Russia, they would have said it was unlikely. Yet there they are.

    When it comes to gas we are living hand to mouth. As our own CRU and Eirgrid have pointed out we have no security of supply, no LNG terminal, and no storage capability. It`s not just an issue of GB turning off the Moffat tap. A drop in Norwegian production or an oil workers strike would result in no gas getting to Moffat in the first place and the lights going out here within a day or two.

    Their is also the problem of Corrib. The 30% of our needs we are currently getting from Corrib is going to drop to virtually nothing within the next few years. Will Norway increase supply here to cover that drop off just because we are a member state of the E.U. where they are ticked off with the E.U. over a price cap on gas which they warned the E.U. not to introduce, and where they have been acussed by some member states of profiteering by increasing their output last year to compensate for the Russian shortage. Even at home their own political rump Green Party have been acussing them of the same.

    There presently is no shortage of gas in other European countries, and hopefully there won`t be anytime in the forseeable future. But that is due to LNG terminals and storage. The same cannot be said for here.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    If there is a technical issue at Moffat and gas supply is cut off from Moffat for a prolonged period of time and this coincides with a fairly regular windless period- what happens then?



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    I don’t see what technical issue would cause such a prolonged closure resulting in all three lines being closed at once, but let’s say it’s more than technical.

    Plants can be fueled with oil because they are all dual-firing. I understand there is some capacity within the pipelines themselves.

    it is absolutely true that we should have some storage to provide a buffer against low winter availability as well as technical transmission problems.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Have you any evidence for any of this?

    Ireland is part of the wider Northern European gas transmission grid.

    There is weeks of storage available on the continent which would be discharged into the European transmission grid If Norway suddenly stopped producing and this would meet the shortfall in the short term.

    Oul reserves can also be called upon.

    From what I know it is completely untrue to say that this would result in ‘the lights going out here within in a day or two’.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,551 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    How do we get it from Europe storage facilities to here?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,848 ✭✭✭?Cee?view


    I suspect that the proposed rural party and their agenda will have quite a bit of urban support as well. It's not just farmers who are sick of the Greens. Some of us "urbanites" recognise that eating is something we kind of need farmers help with!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    The same way we get the Norwegian gas, through pipelines.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Not all Electricity generating plants can be fired with oil, but those that can would need to get the oil from the oil reserves on whiddy island which is not connected to the mainland via an oil pipeline.

    So the question is would supply of oil keep up with demand from these generators.

    I presume that supply would be service via barges of which we would have to charter.

    if supply of oil in this scenario can’t keep up with demand lights go out.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Which plants fire gas but not oil?

    You are certain that no analysis or planning has been done in relation to this?



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    So here is a link that shows all non renewable generators connected to the grid:


    for example huntstown 1+2, dublin bay power and Tynagh are gas only they amount to about 1583MW.

    Am I certain no analysis or planning has been done into what?

    That in the event of a technical fault in Moffat we are screwed? I doubt that scenario has been planned certainly not at the request of our anti gas energy minister.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,551 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    But ya just said Norway stopped producing in the comment I quoted. How does gas get from Europe to here then? Are there gas pipes linking us with mainland europe that avoid any Norwegian pipes?

    (not trying to be a pain in the hole, it's a genuine question)



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Your list is incorrect. Tynagh is designed to be dual fuel as are Huntstown and Dublin Bay.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    The Norwegian pipelines would still be there even if production of gas stopped. There are also pipes linking mainland Britain to the Netherlands and France.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,096 ✭✭✭✭rob316


    Greens are dead in the next election, not because they are useless but FFG go into coalition with growing parties all the time and wipe out any momentum they were making. PD's, Greens before, Labour all go the same way



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I for one am terribly disappointed that the Heal-Rae's won't be joining the Rural political party that Michael Fitzmaurice thinks should be set up but won't do anything himself to set up

    Danny for Minister of Education!



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,061 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Clann na Talmhan, b.1939 d.1965

    Attempted Zombie resurrection, 2023. I really hope Fitzmaurice tries this, it'll be the political death of him.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    This is an Eirgrid list.

    If that list is wrong we have bigger issues!!



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Well the Eirgrid list is saying it’s gas only. They are the TSO so there must be some operational reason why they are gas only from Eirgrids POV.

    This is all kinda beside the point though.

    If we end up needing to use DO in our gas plants we are not in a good place due to the logistical constraints I have highlighted in multiple previous posts over a long period of time.

    Unless anyone can link or point to a study/plan showing how the DO will be moved smoothly and consistently from whiddy to the plants that can use DO as a generating source? (Waits for the local link dumper to conjure something up)



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    According to Eirgrid:

    In the case of aghada, north wall, and poolbeg the fuel type is GAS/DO.

    In the case of Tynagh it’s GAS.

    So are you saying Tynagh can use DO but it’s not a primary fuel source? If so why is DO marked as a secondary fuel source? Lower efficiency so lower output?

    Why would they mark aghada as using either fuel but Tynagh as gas only even though Tynagh can use DO- if what you claim is true?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    From the looks of it, the plants you list are in the same boat as Tynagh (primary fuel is gas, back up is DO) so I can't explain why they list both for some locations but not other. It would appear that list is inaccurate in that regard and my earlier statement was incorrect.

    For further info on it, you'd have to ask Eirgrid why they included/excluded info on their list.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Yeah it’s an interesting one, but my point still stands we have no buffer with on demand gas storage- if we lost Moffat, that would be felt almost straight away while we run around trying to get tankers of oil from whiddy to the mainland and then disperse those loads around the country to the plants that can use the oil.

    That’s a mess.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Evidence of what, that if for whatever reason gas stopped flowing from Norway due to an oil workers strike, (similar to the threatened one that was avoided last Summer), or any because of any unforseen reason then with gas having generated 48% of the total electricity used in Ireland in 2022, I think it is self evident that the lights would quickly go out.


    Any reserves of oil, as another poster has pointed out, are on Whiddy Island without even a pipeline to pump them ashore. Even if you put the limited amount stored there on barges there is virtually nowhere to take it. Tarbert is closing end of the year with a loss of 600 MW.


    European countries individually have built up there reserves of gas using LNG to do so. Why would they send that to us when we have refused point blank to do the same on LNG or storage ?


    Especially if their was a problem with Norway who supply 50% of the natural gas in that transmissin grid. Even if they thought about doing it why would they agree to send it through the U.K. with whom they have no security of supply agreement where the U.K., if there was a problem with Norway, would also be feeling the pinch as they use a daily average of around 4.45 million cubic meters of Norwegian gas. (1,440,000 metric tons 2022.)



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    A bit of clarification from Ryan, taking the last few pages of gas discussions into context

    A letter signed by over 150 groups, including members of the GP, Labour, PBP & Sinn Fein, was sent to Ryan asking him to clarify his position in relation to fracked gas and LNG imports

    In response to the letter, a spokesman for Mr Ryan said one focus of the energy security review under way was the issue of backup storage in the event of a disruption to Ireland’s gas supply from the UK.


    He said that any measures proposed in the review to increase energy security also had to comply with “our legally binding climate targets and avoid locking us into long-term fossil fuel infrastructure or allowing the use of fracked gas. Minister Ryan does not believe that a commercial LNG facility would meet these criteria as it would only expand our use of gas and make us more reliant on such imports. A commercial facility would also be focused on supplying private customers rather than providing backup storage and security for the Irish people which is the strategic objective of the review.”

    Honestly, it sounds like the energy review will recommend a FSRU (Floating Storage and Regasification Unit). At least its something we could sell on once we've no further need of it



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,593 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Greens get in on vote transfers in urban areas. The people in the constituencies most impacted by their policies don't vote for them. The urban voters who vote for them are sold on the Green new deal, and they like bicycle paths, they like electric cars, electric cargo bikes and grant aided home improvements with subsidised solar panels, they like wandering into a theme park they call rural Ireland where they expect to see deer and wolves among the trees, just like the big American park they've seen on wildlife documentaries. The electricity is always on, they think it comes from wind turbines and solar panels. They have been conditioned to think if they consume the right products they can prevent catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. Why would their core vote change? Their main threat is how Sinn Fein manage vote transfers in the next election, there is a floating vote out who abandoned Labour, I expected that the Social Democrats would make a play for that vote, they have yet to make any impact. In the aftermath of the Celtic Tiger bust, the Greens were banished for one or two election cycles. The voting public have short memories and they got back in power because Sinn Fein miscalculated and the Irish establishment loathes Sinn Fein.

    “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” Charles MacKay

    Quite apart from the Greens, ALL major political parties have signed up to the "green new deal", they all march in lockstep with the EU. Bertie Ahern signed us up to Kyoto protocol, Enda Kenny enjoined us to the EU Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) in Paris 2015. The only opposition to the green agenda are the rural independents, there are only 10 of them. The political and economic system is currently under the thrall of the green bubble, like all bubbles you get irrational exuberance and arguments to the contrary are shouted down. The initial green bubble started under a regime of negative interest rates and quantitative easing and plenty of resources, even it's antithesis the shale revolution was built on cheap finance. The final stage of any bubble is when they start massive projects, run out of resources and can't complete them.

    The political calculus has changed, high interest rates, cost push inflation and resource shortages are now a major consideration for voters. The politicians are pushing the delusion of a green economy made by blanketing the country and coastline with wind turbines and solar panels, the bubble blowers are pushing for as many of these to be subsidised as possible under the delusion they can use the surplus to convert fresh water into green hydrogen. Once the mirage of the green new deal collapses, only then will the Green voters abandon them.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



Advertisement