"Green" policies are destroying this country

id argue housing is, but cost of living is now on par....

As with everything in Ireland - including, ironically, actual meaningful actions when it comes to climate change - no-one goes out of their way to actively support something that isn't impacting them or promising to improve their lives or the lives of someone close to them right this instant.

While the light and heat in people's homes turn on and off with the switch, why would the average Joe need to show support for nuclear? If we have enough power to power everything, what's the issue? Average Joe is as likely to support an oil, gas, coal or wind generating plant near to them as support a nuclear.

Which, ironically, is what is holding up most windfarm development today. Objections, appeals and being turned down because the local authority is not happy to sign off on them.

Yet some see perfectly fit to bring proposals that planning should be relaxed:

on grounds of concern over costs to the state through failure to meet climate targets and to consumers. In other words, make it a lot easier to spring them up all of the country regardless of any local objections.

Why only include wind (or renewables) specifically, though? Why not all forms of non-carbon emitting generation, nuclear included, that can wean us off climate damaging emissions?

Why, given they are seemingly so concerned about spiralling costs, can no-one seem to be produce a fully costed proposal to transition our grid to fully renewable based generation?

Finland certainly does have a larger grid (in terms of demand) and has far more interconnection compared to Ireland.

A single nuclear plant in Finland cost over 11 billion euros and took 17 years.

What happened at the International Atomic Energy Agency in your view? Where did they go wrong? Why do IAEA member countries (including Finland, Korea as well as Ireland) allow them to publish such untruths?

How come the IAEA is giving countries like Ireland such wrong advice?

You have been on here posting nothing other than bullsh1t and vague ill-informed notions of your own while calling other posters stupid,and you are still at it with your sarcasm.

You are so ill-informed you believed that if Ireland was to build a LNG terminal it should be built in Qatar or the UAE. You had this idea that we could only introduce 10% of demand from one source, and even after being shown that France alone were last year supplying 70% of their needs from nuclear you still persisted and went whithering on about Moneypoint which in the late 80`s supplied 25% of our needs yet would not be able to handle 700 MW of nuclear.

Seeing as you were determined not to go and do even a little research I finally hand feed you that Sweden was supplying 40% of their needs from 3 nuclear plants and gave you the output from China`s 3 Gorges facility and told you you were looking at the wrong end of the horse. As you failed to reply I assumed you had perhaps copped yourself on, but from your recent post it looks as if that was most likely you not knowing what a horse is.

You have been shown that 1.1GW reactors are no problem for the grid and @correct horse battery staple has shown you that 1.6GW reactors will be no problem either. Yet here you are back again coming up like every other green with your own timeline off the top of your head for nuclear advocating a plan where have no idea of the cost which from what little we do know about it would, just for the offshore section alone would cost multiples of what nuclear could provide. Happy as a clam boy advocating pissing away anything between €150 - €200 Bn on a plan that nobody know if it will even work based on E.U. carbon trading emissions that are not much more than dodgy bookkeeping where we have our 100% electricity renewable companies claiming on the back of second hand, (or possibly 3rd and 4th) Guaranteed Green Energy Certificates that they supplied 56% of renewable electricity when we only generated 35%. The E.U. are even directly involved in the "lets make believe" where wood pellets are carbon neutral.

If emissions are your concern then nuclear should be right up your street, and rather than posting nonsense here you would be better off checking out where the top emitters have decided to follow our lead and wreck their economies. Hint they haven`t.

China merrily burning away at coal and building not just more coal powered energy plants, but more coal powered smelting plants. India and Japan made it clear at COP26 how they viewed coal and their economies, and Germany, that former God of Irish greens, were not long in getting the picks and shovels out to strip mine and import from Columbia`s "The Monster" 70,000 hectare opencast mine that gulps down 30 million literss of water a day

So you would depend on new gas generation to tide us over until 2035? And when carbon goes to €300/tonne what would you do?

Poland had been planning its nuclear for years. There is no hope of completing anything for 2035.

Even if we did believe we could do this, we would begin spending 2 billion a year from today constructing a station that wouldn’t produce anything until 2036 (and likely not until 2040).

thats €1000 euros a household a year, for nothing in return except a promise.

I hope the Green Party get realistic as to what the people of Ireland can do or take financially

or

people see the path of madness there leading us down & get rid of them.

Anybody that thinks we could build offshore cheaper than the U.K. with our history of cost over-runs is living in la-la land, and for anyone that though economy of scale would result in turbine prices coming down are sadly mistaken. Those costs are only going one way, it`s not down and will add further to the cost of this ESB "plan"

Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy a premium maker of offshore wind turbines just reported a loss of €940 million and has announced a cost-cutting program that will result in around 3,000 job losses. Vesta Wind Systems, the worlds largest maker of turbines, recently posted loses of €147 million for the 3rd quarter, and General Electric stated in October that it`s renewable energy unit was likely to lose $2 billion this year. Hendrik Andersen CEO of Vesta stated the "Every time we sell a turbine we lose 8%"

At the same time the race to create bigger and more powerful turbines has resulted in manufacturers spending hundreds of millions on new models, but are not selling enough turbines to recover the costs. (Source: New York Times Nov 22 2022)

But no worries. As soon as China gets it`s economy back up running at full tilt they will sort all that out using coal burning energy generating plants and coal burning smelting plants so we can piss our economy away while we save the planet all on our own by cutting global emission by a tiny fraction of one percentage point.

I have experience of anti cyclonic conditions off the west coast of Ireland for a number of weeks in a row year after year. Sometimes twice a year.

Stats have been provided to back this up on this thread many times.

Gi and look for them if you want.