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
17387397417437441067

Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Well hopefully something like that is on the way, makes total sense. If you happen to come across more details on it whack it up here so we can take a look



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,184 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    I have some time for some of your arguments on this thread, but you taking the piss. We do not live in a dictatorship and the big EU dog will not be wagging us.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,154 ✭✭✭opinionated3




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Its honestly not my intent to take the piss

    If it becomes an EU directive, then all member states are required to transpose directives into national legislation. States can drag their heels on doing it, but only for so long before the EU takes legal action to force the issue. This happens with all directives

    That being said, and I want to be very clear, I have no info beyond your own posts on this matter so I'm honestly unsure as to whether its even a thing because, to be honest, it doesn't sound like a real thing. Whats more likely is countries will be able to set the trigger which best suits their local market e.g. sale, rental or a specific date etc

    What i would like to see is greater targeting of supports and grants over time to the worst performing buildings. For example, everyone knows that the likes of council houses are very, very poor and are often occupied by some of the worst off/most vulnerable members of society who can least afford to spend large chunks of their incomes on heating. I'd rather see a much greater emphasis on those with more funding and focus in that direction. Per Census 2016, there were 143,000 local authority homes in the country. Raising those to BER A2 would have a massive financial benefit for the occupants.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,458 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Banned from sale as in bags of coal and portable butane bottles?

    Or petrol diesel gas coal oil banned completely?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,559 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Easy - recycling ER and the Green's hot air!


    And if you get stuck, lithium batteries are a great source of heat.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,389 ✭✭✭prunudo


    I'd be in that group. Even from an economical perspective, I don't see the merit in spending 30k on new windows, new boiler and extra insulation. I'll be a long time spending that on energy bills.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,184 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    I wasn't listening intently but I thought she was referring to a proposed ban on all 'carbon' fuels for residential heating by 2035. Hard to believe any policy makers could be so ignorant of how rural homes in particular are heated but stranger ideas have been floated.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,458 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Jesus h Christ what a load of crap.

    So not being able to heat your house or water using gas or oil.

    What is the alternative?

    Heat pumps don’t work unless you spend tens of thousands on retrofits and airtightness.

    Airtightness only works if you have mechanical ventilation.

    These fools have no idea of the actual costs that would be imposed on working folk that don’t qualify for this work to be done free and before anyone mentions grants- all grants do is raise the price of materials and labour. Grants don’t reduce the price of anything.



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


    According to this cost calculator, a deep retrofit (which, by the way, is the only type the new EU directive is interested in) would cost circa €80k.

    Doing it on all the local authority homes in the country would cost over €11 billion. Doing it across the EU would cost €2.4 trillion. And remember, these are only the bottom-of-the-heap worst performing homes. It's pure batshit craziness. Do it for new homes, by all means... although energy efficiency costs are part of what makes new homes so expensive. The housing stock will all be eventually replaced -- it happens naturally at the rate of about 2% per year. As I've said before, 2085 might be a realistic target date that we could achieve without sinking the economy.



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


    Great news for us in Ireland - we won't be bound by a mandatory gas reduction if there's a shortage in gas in the EU. Rightly so as we're not directly connected to the EU for gas.

    As ever though, Eamon couldn't help throwing a lie in

    Mr Ryan said it was necessary to cut gas use to protect households and industry from soaring gas costs, with markets indicating that prices may reach 10 times their historical level this winter.

    Gas prices are not "soaring" and any users of gas would be wise to forward buy a good chunk now



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,110 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    At least that from the EU is a bit more realistic than Ryan`s waffling.

    Not that it is going to make a lot of difference if we have no storage or no way of availing of LNG with the greens attempting to block both along with trying to ensure we have no chance of getting anything from the Barryroe field.

    If there is an EU shortage of gas then there will also be a UK shortage, and as far as I recall, isn`t part of our agreement with the UK on the Moffat pipelines that in the event of a shortage they can regard us a region of their gas supply network and are perfectly entitled to cut our supply by the corresponding percentage of any of their other regions ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,379 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    No idea if this is right

    https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1658769839060668416?t=UeMV7BVZOKULmnGAIjYeuQ&s=19

    but basically, ryanair carbon emissions attributed to Ireland and we didn't reduce gas use even though we said we would by 15 per cent.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,458 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Yeah I think you’re right.

    As far as I remember the pain is shared so if UK have a shortage of gas we will also have a shortage.

    Although that will hit us harder as we generate electricity using gas more than the UK does if I’m not wrong.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    Are all of Ryanairs carbon emissions lumped on to Ireland? Surely it should be split between the departure and arrival country.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The target is a lot earlier than 2085, which is, to be honest, laughably unambitious.

    One example, the retrofitting of public buildings looks to be targeted for 2050.

    Though its likely not all will require retrofitting from the current list. One example, Galway City Council main building is to be knocked as they are moving to a new premises. This will likely happen with other ones on the list of 238 but as to how many is anyone's guess



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,379 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    that would be my thought but if you read the first tweet


    One: almost all of Ireland's rise in greenhouse gas emissions was caused by one thing: air travel.

    The post-Covid rebound in flying accounted for 75% of Ireland's 2 million tonne increase in emissions.


    .

    Flights, obviously, take place internationally. The greenhouse gas emissions captured in Ireland's figures are the emissions of air travel companies that are registered in Ireland, reporting revenue to Ireland. The activities of Irish companies do not stop at Ireland's borders.




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


    Yep it's all emissions for Ryanair no matter where the plane takes off and lands. Seems the emissions are linked to where ya pay yer tax. I never knew carbon and revenue were one and the same



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Big changes ahead for the public sector, most especially in relation to the amount of parking provided for staff


    There's a long list of other changes on the way

    The Mandate sets out a range of actions the public sector will take, including:

    • ceasing the use of disposable cups, plates and cutlery in any public sector canteen or closed facility, excluding clinical and healthcare environments
    • promoting the use of bicycles and shared mobility options by providing facilities like secure bike parking, shared mobility parking and charging stations
    • phasing out, over time, the use of parking in buildings that have access to good public transport and active or shared mobility options, while ensuring that sufficient accessible parking is maintained for those with physical mobility issues or staff who may work out of hours
    • procuring only zero-emission vehicles when possible (this may not be possible immediately with heavy duty vehicle)
    • eliminating paper-based processes as far as is practical
    • phasing out fossil fuel heating systems from 2023
    • specifying low carbon construction methods and low carbon cement material as far as practicable for directly procured or supported construction projects from 2023
    • establishing and resourcing green teams and reporting on progress in annual reports


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    MARA, the new regulatory body overseeing the offshore wind industry, will come into being on 17th July this year

    The Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Darragh O'Brien TD, has today (17 May 2023) announced that the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority (MARA) will be established on 17th July, 2023.

    Making the announcement at the Wind Energy Ireland Offshore Wind 2023 Conference at Dublin Royal Convention Centre, the Minister added that Ms. Laura Brien, currently Chief Executive of the Health Insurance Authority, has accepted the position of Chief Executive Officer of MARA.

    The establishment of the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority (MARA) on the 17th July 2023, marks the transition to the new maritime consenting regime and will be a key enabler in respect of Ireland’s ambitions for the Offshore Renewable Energy sector. The new agency will have responsibility for assessing applications for Maritime Area Consents (MACs) which will be required before developers of offshore wind and other projects in the maritime area can make a planning application. It will also be responsible for granting licences for certain activities in the maritime area.




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,110 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    While that EU statement may look like a win for us in that we would not share the same level of cuts of others should there be a shortage it`s basically meaningless as we would have cuts imposed by the UK via Moffat with little or no control over the level of such cuts.

    Without access to the EU supply of LNG, no possibility of anything from Barryroe and no storage capability all thanks to the greens, should their be a shortage the reality is we would end of worse off than the rest of the EU.

    Great job greens, you ideological halfwits.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,055 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Just like Ciaran Cuffe on the radio this morning about the rewetting/rewilding, not a thought as to real consequences.

    "People are just going to have to make an individual choice", he said with regard to the viability of investment into farming out past 2050.

    In Ireland he ****ing says this! They aren't just ideological halfwits, they're sinister and bordering on seditious.

    They must be stopped and obliterated.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    That's bat shït crazy. Do the oil nationals have all the emissions lumped on them from when they sell their fossil fuels?

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    There's an easy win for the government if they could be bothered to get that changed. It would significantly reduce our transport emissions and place the burden on the polluting nation.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



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


    So let me get this right ... Ireland is being credited with ALL of Ryanair's emissions???

    Ryanair carried 160 million passengers last year. It flies 1,750 routes in regions that include North Africa and the Middle East. Only 120 routes (7%) are from Dublin. Ryanair flies more routes internally in Italy than it does between any two countries. Surely it's inconceivable that all that carbon would be counted against Ireland?

    Oh, and here's another delicious irony. Ryanair added 22 routes from Dublin last year "on the back of a scheme funded by €90 million in Government aid to allow airports offer airlines incentives to restore routes and passenger numbers". Yes, you heard that right. The government was handing out free money to try and induce carriers to increase their traffic to pre-pandemic levels. "Carriers that restore more than half their 2019 traffic to Dublin will get 50 per cent of their airport charges back, while those that bring in more than 70 per cent will 100 per cent refunds".

    How schizophrenic is it that the Green's were revelling in the lower carbon emissions cause by the pandemic economic shutdown, and seem all surprised and upset that a resilient economy could bounce back? Meanwhile another wing of government is throwing around sweeteners precisely to get our emissions back up.

    Sources:




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


    I'd say it's an EU wide thing, or even wider and ya'd probably need agreement between many factions to get the ball rolling. Can't see any government helping out the Irish government here

    The frustrating thing is these emissions aren't usually counted, and certainly aren't tackled with any vigour, unlike the pile on for the humble ruminant



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


    We are world class clowns when it comes to building infrastructure. We seem to be great at half-assed bureaucracy, such as all those 300-item checklists you keep spamming us with. Plus spiteful little moves like cancelling civil service parking spaces (did anyone consider that employees would already be using public transport if it was a remotely attractive option?). But building major port infrastructure to incentivise offshore wind? ... I doubt it. I expect they'll pfaff around for years (like they have with the so-called green energy hub at Moneypoint). I also expect some of the successful bidders at the ORESS-1 auction will eventually pull out, citing bureaucratic ineptitude (just as Equinor and Shell did last year). Maybe while MARA is twiddling its thumbs it could look to approving Barryroe and Inishkea, since Ryan has shut down his petroleum affairs division and hasn't found time to sign a simple piece of paper in the last three years. (And it's not just fossil fuels ... he's doing his best to kill Tara Mines with bureaucracy too). Though no doubt he'd claim he's been busy talking to "other world leaders".



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,458 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    How the hell does this make sense?

    Hmmmmmm…..is this carbon tax craic a bit of a cod?



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


    More on the malinvestments that are coming to light as the free money era for green investments dries up:

    €250 million smackers raised, promising a 30% return. €100 million was loaned to other companies in the group. £26 million went in fundraising fees, more than half of it to companies connected to or owned by Solar 21's owners. The flagship project appears to have gone south.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,055 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Its no different in Agrifood sure. There are 5.2 million of us and our food production feeds north of 40 million mouths for a year.

    Eh, you're welcome?



Advertisement