Shannon LNG terminal plans rejected by ABP

Wasn't he just over in the UK begging that they don't cut us off if things go bad.

What a total tosser. Resign you gangster

We can already import our gas from anywhere. There is plenty LNG capacity in the UK and Europe.

The interconnectors to GB have to be paid for by Irish gas and electricity consumers whether they are used or not.

So how will electricity consumers pay for this gas terminal?

Electricity consumers already pay a pso levy to replace fossil fuel with renewables and for maintenance of the grid.

This pso doesn’t increase if a new power line is built?

The cost of gas to supply electricity plants will increase. That cost increase will then be passed on to consumers.

When a new power line is built the cost is most certainly passed on to punters (but the power line brings benefits which may drive down costs in other ways).

Anything that helps the lives of the poor the Church of The Green and their high priests oppose

we never learn

The Irish government target is 936,000 electric vehicles and 600,000 residential premises to be equipped with electric heating sources, including heat pumps, by 2030. Corrib gone by 2030, emergency storage is whatever linepack Moffat gas pipeline can hold and capital writedown of plants like Moneypoint & Tarbert mean very little investment in reliable generation. Irish people and companies must cope with the consequences of a decline in the availability of reliable electricity generation combined with a rapid increase in demand for reliable electricity. Apparently economics does not apply to energy as far as most of the political parties in this state (and the UK) are concerned. Keep this up and by the end of the decade plants like Aughanish Alumina, the Pharma companies and Intel will be gone as future investment in production dries up. Already happening to Germans and a direct consequence of the energy crisis and economic outlook.

france has 56 reactors but almost half of them are offline for various issues and reasons.

france heavily subsidizes their nuclear to the tune of hundreds of billions, + EDF like all other energy suppliers get a lot of profit from the UK market which has the most expensive energy bills in the world, meaning the price to the french consumer is cheaper.

the subsidies to other energy generation forms are tiny in comparison so are affordable but even then there are bigger priorities for the government here meaning the consumer has to pick up a bigger tab.

Right.

So the LNG gas is cheaper?

The greens and their fellow travellers are seemingly intent in stymieing infrastructure investment in Kerry at every opportunity. Is it any wonder the Healey Rae's have such a hold.

It might be cheaper on the ocean. Won’t be significantly cheaper after it’s been landed.

That’s not the issue we are talking about. The issue is that the terminal will be an extra cost that consumers will have to pay for.

(There is nothing inherently wrong with paying for an LNG terminal but it’s ridiculous to claim that we would somehow be getting this terminal for free.)

The cost of the interconnectors is paid for through the gas capacity charge that every gas meter point is billed for. The capacity charge will stay the same to pay for the ongoing cost of the interconnectors whether they are used or not. You could liken this to the PSO levy certainly.

The LNG terminal will charge a margin on the gas it imports to pay for the capital costs of the terminal.

The net result is that gas bills will go up to cover the extra cost. Depending on global LNG prices, the LNG operator may cream off a big profit.

There is no financial benefit in this terminal for consumers. There might be the benefit of ‘security of supply’ in a military situation (very little use really) or in a global supply crunch (no use at all really) and the opportunity to spend a few hundred million euros more of gas consumers’ money to build storage.

At a certain point we have to stop spending money on infrastructure which has no real long term future.

Shocking degree of short sightedness.

There are a thousand different reasons why not going ahead with the LNG terminal is a bad idea but you have to start yakking on about immigration, which has nothing to do with it. Do you ever get tired of listening to yourselves? The fact is that the vast majority of Irish people are happy to be welcoming to immigrants who do us the pleasure of choosing our small island as their destination of choice. So you lot can jump and scream on the Internet all you want but the fact is, that isn't going to change.

(not to derail this thread and it is the only post I will make on this subject)

"the fact is that the vast majority of Irish people are happy to be welcoming to immigrants who do us the pleasure of choosing our small island as their destination of choice"

I don't know if you can backup the above statement but you are wrong according to all recent polls on the subject of immigration.

VM tonight show did a poll - 'Do you think the Govt is doing a good job re refugees/asylum seekers?' YES 10% - NO 90%

IT poll - Q. Do you agree or disagree with - "There is a limit to the number of asylum seekers/refugees Ireland can cope with?" A. Agree 84% - Disagree 11% - (thick 5%)

The SBP Red-C poll - 'Do you think Ireland has taken in too many refugees?' - Yes 75%

Those polls - VM tonight show, The IT and the SBP means the average across the three is 83% against the current policy. That's pretty definitive and takes any margin of error, snapshot in time arguments completely out of the equation

(again apologies, this thread is not about immigration, but Clearz's claim needed to be addressed)

Those who shout loudest about the biodiversity crisis are the same who should about the housing shortage and the need to continue expanding our cities and towns and building on our land

If there is a squeeze on gas supplies in Europe. us having an LNG terminal will make no difference whatsoever. it won’t give us privilileged access to cheap gas. There is loads of LNG capacity planned in Europe now. It’s a completely different situation from three years ago. There is no easy money to be made here.

https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-huge-excess-lng-liquefied-natural-gas-import-capacity-expert-warn/

The interconnector is paid for out of the capacity charge. Consumers will have to pay for it whether it is used or not.

A degasification terminal is no use for storing hydrogen.

Your pricing comments are not correct because that is actually determined by whether reliance is placed on the spot or forward market. The structure of the U.K. gas market of which Ireland is an effective offshoot is based on spot prices with no essential benefit from long term supply contracts. Access to a direct importation terminal could open up the possibility of a gas pricing market on longer term fundamentals. Whether that delivers a cost advantage would depend on the expertise employed but it is not correct to say that it is irrelevant. The Irish and U.K. market prices ramped up substantially quicker than those on the continent for this very reason.

Can the interconnecters be used either direction? Can flow be reversed in one? Is the real issue, that down the line, people are afraid a private LNG terminal could also be used to supply the UK or further afield. Don't really see why this would be a bad idea either btw, just trying to rationalise the negativity against construction.