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
13683693713733741062

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Fracked gas has a terrible global warming foot print (because of its fugitive emission throughout its life cycle) and is not remotely comparable to conventional gas as a transition fuel. This is why the best advise regarding LNG is not to use it as it will not significantly help our emissions targets.

    America and its fracking industry has condemned the world to a very bleak future.



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


    We will see if your thoughts on this change when/if gas supplies become constrained in Europe and we can’t get our hands on supplies to generate electricity or heat homes.

    It would be nice to be able to call on the reserves we could’ve built up over the last while.

    Also- what’s the problem with CNG stored in tanks? (Compressed natural gas).



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


    "The thing with having 2x the demand capacity for wind is that at many times it will produce twice the needed amount of electricity we need. We can ship that out to the continent at wholesale prices or we can use it to create a weeks long buffer for calm periods."

    So again the same hairy ideas which have already been offered by various greens regarding there being enough electricity generated from intermittent wind power at some indeterminate point in the future with that electricity then being exported to Europe? And with bugger all to back that up?

    And when Europe also has lots of its own windy weather and they don't need any extra wind generated electricity. What then?

    As for a "lack of strategic political will to invest in the future". You do know that all the renewable energy generation has been largely built through private investments and but is also heavily subsidised by the state? That the last big Pumped storage facility which was planned- failed to garner private investment as it was seen as a non runner by investors. Surely if any such project was viable then private investors would be all over it like flies?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Private investors want short turn around on capitol. That is why almost all of the major infrastructure projects have been financed by government or government bond issues. The Hoover Dam is a perfect example - as is Ardnacrusha.



  • Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    And yet not a solution to anything. That myth busting nonsense is obsessive nerds who just think they can show people up and mostly want to be right. Now if they had actual proposed solutions to test out that would be exciting.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    I have suggested many solutions here, the fact that you don't like them is not material to whether they are useful contributions.



  • Registered Users Posts: 644 ✭✭✭Darth Putin


    You would need 90-100 Turlough hills to smooth out the holes in wind generation in last month, go and take a peek at Eirgrid dashboard



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


    How the hell would any such facility be a "stranded asset" (new favourite green buzz term apparently) when we knew we will need natural gas as a transition fuel for at least the next 30 years?

    Thing is investors won't shy away from viable investment opportunities whether they are for renewables or alternative sources of energy.

    Lol again with the mudslinging, and throwing the kitchen sink, fridge and just about else into the mix to try and persuade everyone that we can somehow magic up sufficient electricity through unreliable renewables.

    Once Ryan is gone, reckon we won't have to listen to any more of this type of withering about how Ireland alone can somehow manage without a reliable form of energy generation through the period of transition to renewables. The news for you is we can't.



  • Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    We all have opinions and I can manage them civilly thanks. That data post I commented on is just that, it's not solutions. I really have no idea why you imagine this is all about you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    No its about actual solutions that can be implemented relatively quickly. Nuclear and LNG are not solutions to Irelands issues.

    Nothing is easy but proposing to solve one problem with an even worse solution (such as LNG) are not solutions.



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


    There are all types of investors out there including those who are willing to invest in both long term and short term investments. Somewhat duplicitous to suggest otherwise.

    The hoover dam was started in 1931 (shortly after the wall street crash) at a time when such developments were primarily paid by state funding. Ardnacrusha ditto. Hardly a useful comparison tbf.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    Where will we be building this hoover dam in Ireland 🤣



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Its a perfect comparison since that is still the way that major projects are financed. Just look at the National Broadband scheme to see how it works. No private company was willing to undertake the NBI scheme on its own dime.



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


    The robovac reservoir is being built to supply water to the nuclear reactor that we're building on the NI border (mostly to annoy the Unionists)



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Stupid response to a factual point. Nice work.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    Not really I'm not using an example that can never be used in Ireland. What next Geothermal works great in Iceland so we should start investing in it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    The point was about financing not the Hoover dam.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    But there is nothing to finance in relation to the hoover dam example unless someone has just created a huge valley recently. Ireland is to flat for pumped storage on a larger scale. Just like wave energy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    I have posted a link to the Spirit of Ireland proposal. There are around 30 potential coastal valleys which could be used for pumped storage.



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


    Simple answer. Its not. Look up the multitude of investment companies building power plants in the UK and Europe. The Broadband scheme here was instigated because rural areas were not seen as a viable investment vehicle by investors. Ditto your pumped storage ideas. At present it's a complete a non runner for the purpose and at the scale you're proposing.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    Coastal valleys are a completely different kettle of fish. Water needs to get to the ocean through these. You will end up with water logged soil no water run off. Sinking wind turbines solar panels too. crops rotting cows dying in mud. roads washing away. the list goes on.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,067 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    A truly shocking proposal that only a engineer sitting on their arse in an office looking at GIS models on a screen could dream up - a supreme act of Eco Vandalism as pointed out above.

    If Turlough Hill reservoir were to be proposed today, the idea would go up in flames. Sometime in the 80s, there was an idea floated by the ESB I think to dam & flood Luggala valley in Wicklow as a hydro/ pumped scheme. Thankfully the idea was rejected firmly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Thats not how these things work though. Large infractructure projects are almost always financed by governments - and thats all there is to it. Not a single Nuclear power plant would be built without Government stumping up the cash and guaranteeing a fixed return on investment. They are built for strategic reasons not to compete in the free market.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Its a viable proposal - as viable as nuclear in Ireland at least.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,067 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    It's a proposal made by empty vessels who know the 'price of everything and the value of nothing'



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


    You wanna bet? Your construction examples like the Hoover Dam and Ardnacrusha are all well in the past and not relevant

    In the UK the Contracts for Difference (CfD) scheme for Nuclear Power plants etc enabled developers to finance the construction of nuclear projects and only begin receiving revenue when the station starts generating electricity. The CfD approach was used to finance Hinkley Point C, with the developer agreeing to pay the entire cost of constructing the plant, in return for an agreed fixed price for electricity output once the plant is online.

    Investment companies here already have raised huge amounts of capital (on the basis of guaranteed prices for all energy produced) for large-scale renewable energy generation.



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


    Not just fracked gas all oil and gas exploration understate the emissions from flaring or transmission losses from extracting and transportation

    The amount of completely wasted energy and greenhouse emissions lost through flaring and ventimg are never accounted for by proponents of the fossil fuel industry



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭ps200306


    As noted by someone else, you would need 100 Turlough Hills to provide backup for Ireland's energy demand. You say it's a well proven technology, but not in the form proposed -- seawater pumped hydro has only ever been implemented on a small scale. Ironically, many of the objections are environmental. As it happens I'm a big fan of the idea but the engineering challenges are large, including the need for impervious reservoir linings. It's probably decades of construction, especially when you consider Ireland's well-known bottlenecks with planning for everything. I'm sure An Taisce and Friends of the Irish Environment would have a field day. Pretty much everyone is wary of funding engineering and infrastructure projects in Ireland -- even windpower projects -- due to our planning lethargy.

    We are going to keep on burning fossil fuels for power in this country or we are going to have no power. There is no route to 100% sustainable supply from renewables that is going to take less than decades to implement, if ever. The only question is whether Ryan continues to hobble our security of supply with his persistent zealotry and refusal to face facts.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,069 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    So if government is going to be funding these plans are we not entitled to know how much they are going to cost ?

    We`re being told that off-shore wind is now the answer so what is that going to cost?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,069 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Nuclear is doing O.K in France. Their electricity bills last year were 50% cheaper than here. In fact they are going to build more. Not surprising when they look next door and see the massive fortune Germany has spent on renewables and the hole that has left them in.



Advertisement