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
12332342362382391062

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 22,408 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    The report is fully consistent with his speech, which was launching the final section of the AR6 report. The scientists have been warning us that we have to keep warning to substantially below 2c, yet we are on track to reach 3c on current emissions.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,076 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    I know the Aran Islands very well with my wife being born and raise there and for her job visiting all three on a very regular basis. She also has extended family living on all three and we both have friends native to all three.

    Mecanudo is spot on as regards Dara O Maoildhia who has, shall we say being kind, a foot in both camps in this area and their is not universal celebration over many of those that have availed of these upgrades on the islands. The islands are tourist cash cows, with the emphasis here on cash. Many have been questioning the money provided by the state that due where to their taxable incomes they would not qualify for the same level of aid. I`m sure you can work out for yourself just why that is from what I have said.

    There is a quote often attributed to Mark Twain that sums up that link; "If you don`t read the newspaper, You are uninformed. If you do, you are misinformed."



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,076 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    You have a problem with 3 paragraphs as it is according to you ranting, so I`ll do this in steps that hopefully you will understand and may be able to give a creditable coherent reply too.

    I presume your 650m. cost of a LNG terminal is from the German cost of same. Those are terminals that are being built green hydrogen ready as well. All costs are relative, so just to put that 650m. in perspective the state proposes to spend 165b. on infrastructure this decade alone. 650m. is less than 0.4% of that total. The fact that a private company is seeking to build such a terminal here would hardly suggest they are doing so for the purposes of losing money either now does it ? I must have missed where you compared LNG to another secure transitional energy source thatw ill be cheaper, so maybe you could point me to where you show those figures ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,377 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie




  • Registered Users Posts: 15,076 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    You might want to dig a little bit deeper into Co-Ops on the islands and this particular gentleman`s one. As someone with a qualification in rural development I can assure you Co-Ops are very rarely as they appear to the casual observer.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 20,047 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Don't worry, Ryan has it sorted, he's suggested people take shorter showers and drive less. Glad we have such a deep, critical thinker in government looking out for our financial wellbeing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    You nearly managed to post without a condescending comment but as usual failed

    The 650m is from the Kerry LNG predicted costs. Google it.

    Are you saying we should just blow 650m on Kerry LNG because it is not that much money? that's not really an attitude anyone should have.

    I could trawl the entire thread but the details got posted to you a number of times that the Kerry LNG would increase electricity costs and it would be out of commission before it had paid for itself.

    Quick tip....I did answer multiple times. The connection to UK, the gas connection to UK, the planned connection to France



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    Its not. Quoting a career politician mouthing off and looking at the next career opportunity is certainly not helpful eitherway



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    Average earth temperature hasn't changed in 200years, sea has risen less than 3 inches in 100 years and any data up to the 80s is open to question. IPPC need to peddle this guff to keep the funding coming in, This is all about money and control.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,076 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    I know what the cost of the proposed Kerry LNG is. It`s the same as a German LNG terminal which will also be built for that price and green hydrogen. ready.

    Where did even I suggest we would be "blowing" 650, or where did you get this idea from that I was suggesting we, as a state, should "blow" 650m. on a private company proposal to build an LNG terminal in Kerry ? The only reference I made to this private company application was I doubted they saw it as a loss making concern and wanted to build it out of feelings of charity.

    I pointed out to you that for less than O.4% of the states infrastructures spend for this decade alone, we would have a LNG terminal suppyling us with a secure energy source recognised by the E.U. as a transitional source that would have us in compliance with E.U. rules which we could source worldwide on our own, or be able to avail of from the E.U. through their agreement with the U.S. on LNG.

    None of your alternatives can do that. Both our own regulator and the E.U. recognise that the U.K. is not a secure energy source and the planned French inter-connector is 5 years away, and currently looking that even if we had it today then there would be little flowing through at peak demand times seeing as the French themselves were importing energy this winter.

    No answer as to where you did these comparative studies that show LNG would be so much more expensive than an alternative source that would fulfill the above criterion, but no great surprise there.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    I could trawl the entire thread but the details got posted to you a number of times that the Kerry LNG would increase electricity costs*

    You better do that then*. Because I previously asked for a source of that claim and nothing was forthcoming.

    How about we let the Kerry / Shannon LNG terminal go ahead and as paid for by the developers of the project. That's no skin off your or any greens nose. And we know we need a safe, secure and reliable source of natural gas up to 2050 and potentially beyond.

    Europe has just banned all coal, gas and oil supllies from Russia from the beginning of next month.

    Following Brexit and the invasion of Ukraine, natural gas supplies to us from the UK, are now even less secure than when the Regulator here highlighting that as a significant issue.

    In the face of Europe wide increased competition for natural gas and electricity

    • The natural gas connection from the UK is no longer secure

    • Ditto the electric connection from the UK

    • Ditto the planned connection from France with France now importing electricity from its EU neighbours

    Why? Because all European countries are now in a scramble for a range of increasingly scarce non renewable fuel sources

    Quick tip. Previous "answers" mean didly squat in the face of those facts




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    When will Kerry be built? you are disregarding the France interconnect in favour of Kerry which won't be built till after it

    Now I have pointed this out before and you ignore

    The quickest way Ireland can ramp up electricity supply now is via renewables. Wind, solar etc etc etc

    But all this has been provided already and we will end up back at "What if the wind stops" 🙃



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    Btw I too was involved in that particular discussion. And as the developers of the Kerry / Shannon LNG terminal stated in May last year the facility would be ready by Mid 2022 pursuant to planning permission. Obviously that didn't happen due to various green objectors. That's the lead time. It's not a complicated build. Much of the necessary infrastructure consists of prefabricated tanks and pipes. And yet hazel are still whistling dixie over something you evidently know nowt about.

    And its not "if" the wind stops. It's when. And we know that is a not uncommon occurance. Or have you forgotten the difference between our needs NOW and some imagined FAR away time when all is rosy and Renewables provide 100% generation capacity

    So again - a question you have failed to answer many many times

    do you believe the EU policy on the use of safe, secure and reliable source fossil fuels (during the period of transition to renewable energy generation which includes imported LNG and the use of European natural gas) is wrong?



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,377 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    There is no “if”.

    You need to understand that.

    You still haven’t said wether you agree that it’s the GP policy to leave Ireland dependent on foreign gas post 2025 when corrib runs out.

    Why can’t you answer that?



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,408 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    He was speaking as the secretary general of the UN. He's not some yokel trying to appeal to voters

    Anyway. You have proven that no warning will ever be clear enough that you'd actually listen

    Posting ridiculous videos from climate change denial youtube channels over a decade old in response to the latest damning report on the urgency of action on climate change.

    You have shown that you're not about reason or evidence. There is no evidence that would ever change your mind



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Are we not dependent on foreign gas now anyway as Corrib can't (and never has) met our full requirements?

    Even if Barryroe was opened up we would still be dependent on foreign gas too.

    I'm just wondering if it's a moot point as, no matter what, we're going to be dependent on foreign gas until we complete the transition.

    We can meet some of our requirements but we will still need a lot of foreign gas regardless.... unless there's something I'm missing maybe



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    🤣

    Why don’t you quote your own post again…..



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,569 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Obviously you have not read the latest report because its working group 3 - The Summary for Policymakers.


    The IPCC was established to provide the decision-makers and others interested in climate change with an objective source of information about climate change. The IPCC does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters. Its role is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the latest scientific, technical and socio-economic literature produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change, its observed and projected impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.


    source

    The stated mission of the IPCC is NOT to discover what accounts for climate change, it is to assess "the risk of human-induced climate change." An assumption is made by the media and those with vested interests that the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming theory promulgated by this organisation is correct and there is no incentive to address this. The intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC), as its name suggests, is a political rather than a scientific organisation. Its key personnel and even lead authors are often environmental activists appointed by governments. The IPCC reports are edited and rewritten by non-scientists to fulfil the political objectives of the IPCC’s members once the scientists who help write them have finished their work. The reports contain much science, however, a small group of political insiders pick what science to include and what to leave out.

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



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,408 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    A LNG terminal is not just prefabricated tanks and pipes. If they said it would take a year to build they are lying



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    He was speaking as a career politician. Nothing more

    And excuse but that is bs. What videos of climate change denial?

    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118891317/#Comment_118891317

    tbh your stance is little different from various the end of days extremists who believe that civilisation will undergoe a fiery ending in the next month / year / decade. Its bs and does nothing to help the issues of climate change regardless

    Post edited by Mecanudo on


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    The greens have consistently been shown to have engaged in deliberate disinformation whether that is about LNG, our reserves of natural gas or the reliability of renewable energy generation.

    It is therefore truely ironic that you would chose to accuse an independent company of "lying" lol.

    Fyi I never claimed the facility was "just prefabricated pipes and tanks"

    Anyway here is a digital representation of the facility. Obviously Hoover Dam level of complexity 🙄

    To persuade others of such beliefs regarding LNG etc will take more than misquoting. No one is fooled eitherway



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,408 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    AR6 is the 6th synthesis report, WG3 is the working group 3, the 3rd section of AR6 that are tasked with dealing with mitigation and adaptation

    The fact that barely anyone has referenced this report in this thread, and you don't seem to know the basics about how the IPCC reports work says more than enough about the quality of the sources you get your information from



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,076 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Why do you keep banging on about Kerry ?

    The application to build a LNG terminal in Kerry is by a private company, that I doubt are doing so because they agree with your assertion, (which incidentally you have failed to back up), that there is a cheaper secure energy source that satisfied that description based on what our own state regulator had to say on the subject, or would also comply with the E.U. on the same. When it comes to economics, I would be inclined to go with hard nosed private companies than the baseless assertions from random self styled internet experts when it comes to financial viability.

    I have pointed out to you that the French inter-connector is 5 years away, and indications that there will be little or nothing flowing through it even then if the present is anything to go by, and the German Government are building two LNG terminals they say will be operational in 2 years and that will include them being green hydrogen ready as well.

    What is it you find so difficult to understand? We need a secure source of gas because wind,and solar are so unreliable. Wind turbines or solar panels are not going to achieve that in the immediate future, and it is highly debatable that they ever will provide a 100% reliable energy supply. So with you backing the Irish Green party`s position on LNG, a position that is completely out of step with the E.U., what credible alternative to LNG have you that you have so far failed to provide ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,408 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    If you think that can be built from scratch in 1 year you're delusional



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,076 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    On us needing foreign gas you have not missed anything.

    The question is with the Green party determined to block all LNG where are we going to get this secure source of gas ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    The time lines given was best case 2027, which I think was from last year so that’s 2028 now

    A lot of rubbish posted on here

    VP says one phase takes 3 years.

    Sam Abdalla, vice-president of project development with Shannon LNG’s shareholder, US-based New Fortress Energy

    “This first phase of development will create 70 long-term direct jobs, once operational, with an average of 270 construction jobs over a three-year construction period,” he added.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    Nope. Not my "think". So perhaps its you who is "delusional"?

    Thats what the company detailed. If Germany can do Hydrogen ready LNG terminals in approx two years then no reason why we canot do a straightforward LNG terminal is around half that especially where a large proportion of its construction is prefabricated. You'd swear to dodge they were building the Taj Mahal - the way some are going on here 🙄



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    I told you about the France interconnect and you had no idea about it, then lied about the completion dates.

    See above for comment from the VP if the company, 3 years for one phase. I already gave you the timelines and you continue to ignore and point to Germany which has no relevance.

    Are you going to continue to post incorrect information ?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 22,408 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Hydrogen ready LNG is basically an Ammonia terminal. Ammonia doesn't need to be chilled and all of the infrastructure insulated to maintain a constant temperature of about minus 170c



Advertisement