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
17807817837857861067

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,457 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    That would because you don’t understand that all the money a private company spends- they have to make back from their customers and generate future ever increasing profits, by charging customers costly prices.

    That is the crux of the problem with private companies owning energy generation- it’s a point you and other green zealots like you conveniently ignore.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,457 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    hmmmm.

    Are you guaranteeing prices will be lower when we get a 100% renewable grid?

    Simple yes or no answer please.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    MARA officially launched today


    The Government has today (13th July 2023) officially launched the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority (MARA), marking a significant milestone in the State's stewardship of the maritime area including plans for renewable offshore energy development.

    The newly established authority will be responsible for regulating development and activity in Ireland’s maritime area and its role will include assessing applications for Maritime Area Consents (MACs), which are 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.

    The establishment of MARA represents the beginning of phase two for Ireland's all-of-government approach to renewable offshore energy and will determine how we develop this valuable resource.

    The Maritime Area Regulatory Authority, or MARA, is a new state agency whose functions are set out in the Maritime Area Planning Acts 2021 and 2022. It will have a key role to play in the new streamlined consenting system for the maritime area, including:

    • Assessing Maritime Area Consent (MAC) applications for the maritime area, which are required by developers before development permission can be granted;
    • Granting marine licencing for specified activities;
    • Compliance and enforcement of MACs, licences and offshore development consents;
    • Investigations and prosecutions;
    • Administration of the existing Foreshore consent portfolio;
    • Fostering & promoting co-operation between regulators of the maritime area.

    MARA is a body under the aegis of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and is located in Wexford.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,457 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    I don’t believe climate change is A HUNDRED PERCENT MAN MADE so maybe @Akrasia things I’m a right wing racist 🧐?



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,457 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Shareholders get paid from the profits made by profitable energy companies.

    More profits= happy shareholders.

    Is this not the case?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,105 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    No attempt to answer what you were ask, but then perhaps you didn`t understand what part CapEx and OpEx play in determining the cost to the consummer of a product.

    The best possible price I have seen for this offshore plan is €200 Bn for the Capex alone. I have not seen anyone put forwars any figure to indicate otherwise. That includes renewable companies that would not be slow in coming forward to claim it could be done cheaper as we have already seen from how the Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland (ASAI) had to tell our "green energy" providers to cease and desist from advertising that they were providing 100% green energy when anyone with basic national schools mathematics could see it was blatant lies.

    So, with the CapEx alone being €200 Bn, and that is just for the first 15 -20 years (over €100,000 for every household in the country btw) do you really think these private companies are pricing their contracts less than that, or are they doing so on a charitable basis because we came up with Guinness and we`re great crack for a night out ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,549 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    Isn't there an agreement made with renewables that they get paid regardless of using the energy, or is it they are paid even if the wind doesn't blow? Could be wrong there in my understanding. Perhaps you could educate me on it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,549 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    Didn't we have some of the lowest electricity prices when the generation was state owned and before it was privatised for competition reasons?



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,105 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    I was always under the impression that you were supposed to learn from historical mistakes rather than try to repeat them.

    1973 OPEC held the world, us included, to ransom because we had all our eggs in the fossil fuel basket. Now just 50 years later we are handing the same over to private companies with a tail of the dog government party providing assistance. No development of any know fossil fuel sources being allowed, not even exploration to determine if there are any more, and attempts to block LNG.

    I find the LNG one especially difficult to understand. We have posters on here opposed to LNG because of fracking, yet seem to be all in favour of using the same process for geothermal. I mentioned this to one in particular a few times but have yet to get an answer as to why there is this apparent great difference in the process for geothermal.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,897 ✭✭✭Jizique


    Not sure that is true, it is a bit like saying that the bid for the children's hospital was won at a fixed price and the developer took all risk on cost overruns.

    The intricate details of these contracts are well beyond the scope of us mere mortals (who have an interest) let alone the average punter, but bidders have been pulling out of fixed bids in other countries (US, UK) due to cost and planning issues, so I am not fully convinced that the taxpayer is not underwriting these bids.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,741 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    In the UK the playbook was to underbid on the "fixed" price but then wring the government (usually an NHS trust) for "contract variations" (e.g £80 to change a lightbulb). The contract detail my have been complex but the intention was as simple as ever.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,380 ✭✭✭WishUWereHere


    You come on here hogging the limelight making wild and in some cases unfounded remarks. Then when challenged, you either a) don’t know the answer, or b) ignore the questions.

    Now you come along saying in some cases you report. Really, you say this thread is not about you whereas in reality it’s ALL about You and your deluded Green colleagues.

    Perhaps those of us whose questions you refuse to answer should report you?

    Post edited by WishUWereHere on


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    So what it sounds like is that you haven’t read the papers and don’t actually know anything about it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    What relevance does the cost of building a hospital have to this?

    Ireland has been issuing these types of contracts for decades. Can you tell us about 5 instances of how a cost overrrun has been passed on to the electricity consumer?



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,105 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    We do not have a good history when it comes to awarding contracts for state infrastructure not needing to be bailed out at the taxpayers expense. We continuously hit the "big hole" stage as in, get started, big a hole and dig it big enough so there is no alternative to finding the money to fill it in.

    We have had it with Luas, The Port Tunnel, the HSE PPARS computer system, the motorway network, the national broadband plan, and now the Childrens Hospital late and heading towards €2 Bn with nobdy even able to give a gaurantee that will even cover it.



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



    You have an objection to the EU taxing fuel but not once have I ever seen you complain when the oil industry announce scandalously high profits on the back of global crises.

    How many times does this need to be explained -- oil companies don't set the price of oil. Otherwise you'll need to explain how they voluntarily decided to lose billions in 2020.

    Fossil fuels receive trillions of dollars in subsidies. That has to stop.

    You've been reading too much barmy leftwing press. 92% of these supposed "subsidies" are estimates of alleged environmental costs. The other 8%, by and large, are subsidies to fossil fuel users, not oil companies. The obvious recent example are EU-wide payouts to alleviate consumer costs of gas and electricity. You want to stop them? Be my guest, but prepare for enormous political instability, even more than has been seen already. There's a reason why the biggest subsidisers -- Russia, China and Iran -- are despotic governments that need to keep their populations in check. Nobody -- not even the lefties are prepared to stop subsidies when they turn out to be mostly poverty alleviation programs ...


    If you want to see subsidies that are actually paid out to private investors, look no further than the renewables sector.



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


    But you didn't find it strange when you were worried about how much Barryroe Offshore Energy were going to spend on an oil and gas field. In fact it was even stranger since BOE would have gone to the wall if they couldn't produce fuels profitably at prevailing market prices, whereas wind/solar companies are price setters.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Those examples you provided are construction and build-to-spec IT contracts, nothing like the RESS renewables contracts. Can you give five or instances in which renewables projects (or other energy capacity contracts) had to be topped up by the state to be rescued.

    Separatrly, if you do not think we can build energy infrastructure as a nation, what do you propose we do? Start a candle factory?



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,404 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Emissions down 1.9% in 2022. Great to see. Let’s take pride in a drop in emissions despite it being the post Covid recovery year and not complain it’s not enough.



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,419 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Lol.

    Oil companies operate as a cartel. The oil market is not a free market. They got burned in 2020 because of COVID but that was a global shock, in 2022 they went right back to record setting profiteering

    Seriously. You do not have a clue how pernicious these companies are. It's billionaires **** over the entire planet for their own profits. They've put us in this position, and stood in the way of all global efforts to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels for decades. They won't stop **** us over until they have gleaned every last dollar of profit they can and don't care how much harm it does to everyone else



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,591 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande



    Every person reading this depends on the availability and use of hydrocarbons for their existence today, electric power provided by solar panels and wind turbines is not viable technology to substitute energy and end products derived from hydrocarbons in the timelines set out under the concept of net zero. Hydrocarbons are heavily taxed, that is only possible due to productivity made possible by use of said products.

    The price does serve as a rationing mechanism and when it gets too high, producers and consumers at the margins are the first to be cut off, even tax revenue falls leaving governments borrowing more, with interest payments that must be paid from the use of our labour to produce a product people want and can afford, we are fortunate to benefit from tax efficiency schemes (in effect renting the sitting room to MNCs and counting their income as ours).

    People in Ireland are being put in a very precarious position by decisions taken by our government today, despite the insistent propaganda, warm weather is not one of those problems, the lack of energy and restrictions on production resulting from net zero policies and their implementation necessarily mean a negative economic impact. It is not possible to operate modern economy using unreliable low yield energy generation. The problem for Ireland, we are on the end of hydrocarbon supply lines, by the end of the decade, implementing the blind policies of the EU at the behest of another set of billionaires, we will be short energy and we will pay dearly.

    For those idiots, who think heat is a threat, remember you live ~53° north of the equator on an island facing the Atlantic, with mean daily winter temperatures of 4 to 7C and typical Summer temperatures of 12 to 16C being an improvement. There is metric called excess Winter deaths, cold is a killer, every year. Consider for 2 weeks prior to Christmas 2022, wind and solar generation completely failed in this country, at the same time the all time record demand for electricity was set. We had access to coal and gas & oil generation, we were extremely lucky, no power outages, the weather system lifted and then remainder of the Winter was relatively mild across Western Europe. By the end of the decade, in Ireland we will have more limited access to hydrocarbons and can expect system failure and higher poverty as a consequence, simply because it is impossible to deliver cheap or reliable energy generation using wind and solar and whatever unicorn farts scheme they propose.

    Demand will continue for hydrocarbons, anyone looking at global energy consumption charts and human population growth can see that and you can make the case that wind and solar electricity generation sources are a useful part of that energy mix, the fatal conceit is you can prevent exploration for hydrocarbons today and not bear any consequence tomorrow. There is a reason Western governments started looking for other sources after the 1970s oil shocks and set about breaking the power of the OPEC cartel. Germany built LNG storage, quickly and signed long term deals to supply natural gas. Ireland is at the end of the hydrocarbon supply line, we are dependent on continued Norwegian gas exploration via a single pipeline to maintain reliable electrical generation and home heating. Most production of diesel and petrol used on the Irish market is done in the UK, even there the oil majors have been pulling out and the number of refiners has fallen over decades. There is a developing supply problem and we now have to factor in how to deal with that. Low density, expensive and unreliable electrical generation is not the answer.

    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: 10,457 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Same as any major infrastructure job, but it’s up to the PM team to have as many costs as possible caught on the BOQ at the start and the track all extras (variations) coming in, and dispute if needed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ...its not enough! we ve known about this for decades! again, its not enough!



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,897 ✭✭✭Jizique


    Time to head to India, China and other EMs to spread the message, taking in the US on the way home - then swing by Moscow and ask Putin to stop the war before hitting Kyiv to tell Zelensky the war is causing too many emissions and it is time to concede to save the planet



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,105 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    How so ?

    Are you saying these contracts to renewable companies do not go through the rigourous examinations by Ryan that the likes of Barryroe went through, or is it like The Green Party last time they were in government, just believing what motor deisel engine manufacturers told them on the specs ?

    I told you how "the big hole" scheme works, get going, dig a hole, make sure you make it big enough so that there is no alternative other than more money being found to fill it in. It`s scheme that is not just know by private companies but by governments and government parties who have an agenda.

    We have seen multiple uses of it here by companies with state contracts. 15 companies with state contracts of €40 million and over for roads were bailed out by the taxpayer to the tune €270 million. You have only to look at the Childrens Hospital nowadays to see it in action. Private companies aren`t dumb. They will not engage in the practice when digging small holes. Not when the know there are going to be much bigger holes to be dug down the line where the real money will be. If I was a cynic then I would see green shoots of that emerging already with Ryan now granting renewable companies their wishes and gauranteeing them they will be paid for whatever they generate, whether we use it or not.

    But, as I said it`s not just private companies who are aware of how the "big hole" scheme works. Governments or parties in government are well aware of it when it comes to an agenda they know if the final price to the taxpayer or the consummer was known they would be ran out of town. Something, again if I was a bit of a cynic, I would be looking at on this offshore plan and asking how come nobody can give a cost for it.

    Now that is a real head-scratcher is it not, but perhaps you can give the answer to that one ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ...yet some of these countries have already been investing heavily in alternatives, far more so than ourselves, we truly are the laggards here! some of those nations have been heavily investing in far more efficient modes of transport such as electrified high speed rail, thank god we done this decades ago, jesus where would we be without our current network!

    ...and again, many of the resources from the countries mentioned, are actually used in creating our needs, thats us again!



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,608 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,591 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Weather attribution studies used in mass media scares are completely irrelevant, none of these can be tied to the concentration of C02 or other gases in the atmosphere. Nobody with any sense is going to standup and say these events would not happen if we humans changed our consumption patterns. How many wind turbines or solar panels need to be built to guarantee we won't experience inclement weather? There is no cause and effect, these stories are simply media hype to sell more solar panels and wind turbines.

    If you want to look at long term data, the number of live lost and injuries and property destruction due to severe weather events has generally declined. There is more property around to detroy as well compared to the past. Have a look in the records such as exist prior to the 20th century, we had weather driven disasters like the 1740-41 year of slaughter. The original village location where I grew up got washed away in 1839 (Night of the big wind), the great storm of 1703 had an impact on the course of history and knocked back the British navy. Does anyone remember what happened on account of Cyclone Mocha? I noted mass media hyping this one in advance earlier this year. Do you remember what the outcome was?

    The reason fewer people get killed or injured is short term weather forecasting allows people to be fore warned and take action. The standard of construction has improved so buildings are designed to handle the 100 year storm, we have even mapped the flood plains and avoid building in those areas. The reason for the better weather forecasting is directly linked to hydrocarbons, without them powered flight would not happen and without powered flight there would be no space travel and none of the rapid development of weather forecasting. Back when the pre-twentieth century weather events I mentioned above happened the world population was under 2 billion, today there are ~7.5 billion people, the numbers of people dying in real numbers due to weather events is a tiny fraction of what it once was.

    As far as we can determine temperatures have increased since the early nineteenth century, how many generations of your family survived this? We have been living with climate change all of our lives and as long as return of the northern hemisphere ice sheets holds off we should continue to thrive. Generally current climate patterns around the world are net beneficial to humans.

    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: 22,419 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    You're the guy who doesn't believe in icebergs as they're standing on the deck of a sinking Titanic


    'You can't trust the studies that say icebergs can sink ships, there's not enough evidence, what's to say all those ships didn't sink for some other totally unrelated reason...."



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,381 ✭✭✭prunudo


    After seeing the flooding on the roads around the place today, I'd say there's plenty of people delighted they have an suv to pass through them without fear of getting swamped. They're great in the warmer weather too with their ac. and even better in the winter during the snow with their four wheel drive. Long live the suv I say.



Advertisement