"Green" policies are destroying this country

So you think we can just drop fossil fuels in the morning and just switch to renewables.

Have you learned nothing the past year. Renewables are undependable

Why else do you think Europe is now burning anything they can get their hands on, or why do you think Ryan is now scrambling to build more gas fired plants ?

An interesting observation is that it's reckoned in as little as 300 million years all plant life and trees will be long gone as a result of a lack of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Anything humans do is doomed one way or another.

Nobody is proposing windmills.

And your hand waving of biblical flooding as if it's no big deal if enough money is spent on adaptation is ridiculous. The Adaption they will end up having to do, is relocating. but when I talk about climate refugees' you also say that is ridiculous

Germany, one of the richest most highly developed countries in the world was caught unprepared for flooding in 2020. If the rain is heavy enough it overwhelms any defenses, and it is mu h more expensive to build defenses for the most extreme rainfall, which is becoming more likely due to climate change

What part of the word transition implies immediately drop all fossil fuels?

Seriously. You just do not get it at all do you. Or else you're trolling like ps200306 is.

The RESS auctions price was high because offshore wind in Ireland is at the base of that technology curve. We have zero infrastructure to support that yet. As we build up that industry in Ireland the costs and price will come down.

You also need to factor in inflation. If copper goes up 10% and general inflation is 10% then the real cost is the same.

Was the latest RESS strike price was for off-shore ?

Far as I recall it was only for on-shore and solar.

They have been building offshore wind off Scotland for some time now. They have the onshore and martime equipment infrastructure down pat and have had so for some time now. When I have costed offshore wind I have used one of the most recently completed offshore wind farms - finished only last year - when comparing with the cost of nuclear. By your supposed logic, this should have been a cheaper than previous projects example as it would have benefited from this mature infrastructure if that actually mattered a lot.

So even if there will be future cost savings, the all up cost will still be double that of nuclear (in the short term - it gets worse with time), so by your supposed logic, the first Irish ones are going to be even more costly than that, making the economics even more mind bogglingly stupid.

An interesting tid bit Dr Michael Moore mentioned in a video was that in the last interglacial, if memory serves, CO2 levels got so low that there was a mass global extinction of plant life at higher altitudes because the CO2 concentrations were too low for them to survive.

The earth is in an imbalance. Because humans have altered the chemistry of the atmosphere, there is a radiative forcing of about 1.6 watts per square metre caused mostly by human emissions of GHGs

1.6 w/m2 doesn't seem very much, but cumulatively, it adds up to the equivalent energy of 5 Hiroshima sized nuclear bombs being added to the planet every second, 24 hours a day.

Most of that energy goes into the oceans, where it is causing things like oceanic heat waves that kill marine wildlife, bleaching corals, melting Ice shelves and ice sheets and also expanding the oceans leading to sea level rises, fuelling storms and increasing the intensity of rainfall

The rest of the energy is going into heating up the atmosphere leading to the other effects we can see, such as changes in rainfall patterns, extreme heatwaves, droughts followed by floods etc

If you think the earth is in thermodynamic equilibrium than you are completely misinformed

And the thermodynamic inbalance is literally causing less heat to radiate out to the mesosphere. roughly same amount of heat is coming in from the sun which is relatively stable , less heat is escaping due to the changes we have made to our planet that are causing this radiative forcing.

The transition to renewables should involve building the absolute minimum new fossil fuel infrastructure that we can get away with.

The costs of failing to address climate change are much higher than the cost of changing our energy infrastructure

The absolute minimum depends on how quickly we build our renewable infrastructure.

If we had begun building offshore wind when Scotland did, we wouldn't need those new gas turbines. If we introduce regulations that require heavy energy users, like industry and data centers to have their own on site storage to reduce their impact on peak demand, we would need fewer gas turbines. If the regulator forces the energy companies to activate their feed in tariffs and introduce proper time of use tariffs that actually reward consumers for using power at low demand then we'll need less gas. If the government took ownership over installation of solar and upgrading to electric heating instead of deferring to the market with grants and incentives that lead to abuse and feet dragging...

If this was treated with the urgency it demands we could do an awful lot to cut our reliance on fossil fuels.

The worst thing is, all of the changes needed make financial sense in the medium term. They save money and improve air quality and make people's homes more economical and warmer places to live.

The pace of action is glacial in this country. We could be doing a lot more.

As pointed out by others, the recent RESS auction strike price was not cheap for on-shore being the same as the U.K. recent strike price for nuclear. Expecting a future strike price for off-shore for less does not sound logical.

I honestly don't care. If we need to pay a bit more for energy, that's a political problem. It can be fixed later on if we need to.

Delaying the transition will cost us more in the long run. The marginal cost of renewable power is very cheap. I would prefer if the government built the infrastructure and kept them in public ownership, but they chose to auction them off. That's fine, as long as we're moving in the right direction

Only one thing for it - higher carbon tax for us!

When it comes to anything financial you are either clueless or such a fanatic you honestly do not give a damn for anything or anybody other than your green wet dream.

People are not being asked to "pay a bit more for energy". They are being asked to pay eye-watering sums for energy while greens are still determined to keep upping carbon taxes, pushing through more rules and regulation to force them into paying even greater sums for heat pumps, retrofitting and EVs. Money the vast number of people simply do not have.

You, nor any green, has not even a clue as to how much their "solution" of piling on more wind turbines will cost. Or even if it would work.The idea that the State could finance what greens favour, only adds to that greens are a bunch of financially clueless ideological fanatics.

If this marginal cost of renewables is so cheap then it`s time we saw it in action, but if the latest RESS strike prices are any indication then cheap it is not.

The State does not magically generate finance. It is provided by the citizens via taxes. The idea that the State could finance the blank cheque that greens are looking for just further shows that they are a bunch of financially clueless dangerous ideological fanatics. It also makes their opposition to the State building an LNG terminal due to the cost being so hypocrtically laughable.