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

19119129149169171074

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 843 ✭✭✭m2_browning


    I suspect we will have commercial fusion before the 37 GW of offshore wind we were promised by 2050 in Ireland (which was hilarious to begin with in its absurd ambition and cost)

    Especially now that projects are being cancelled left right and centre



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Especially now that projects are being cancelled left right and centre

    Which ones have been cancelled?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Not a surprise given the amount of records broken, everywhere, this year




  • Registered Users Posts: 843 ✭✭✭m2_browning


    See higher up for multiple links, basically most of the US 30GW offshore wind by 2030 plans

    These same companies are involved in Europe and face the same technical and economic issues

    tho I wouldn’t be surprised that here instead of cancelling these companies go cap in hand to government for bailouts like Siemens is doing in Germany atm



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Ahhh, when you mentioned Irelands 37GW of offshore I thought you were talking about Irish projects, you really should have clarified.

    In terms of power generation projects being cancelled in the US, it happens, just look at the nuclear industry, hundreds of reactors cancelled over the decades. @Capt'n Midnight has provided loads of detail both here and in the nuclear thread in the infrastructure forum, you should take a look

    One relevant post




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 843 ✭✭✭m2_browning


    The companies doing the cancellations are mostly European and the technical and economic problems are same here if not worse

    eg Orsted

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/01/business/energy-environment/offshore-wind-farm-new-jersey.html

    Btw you don’t think it’s funny that our target is

    5GW by 2030

    20GW by 2040

    37GW by 2050

    which is ridiculously optimistic compared to the US 30GW by 2030 target and they have the worlds largest economy that is 53x ours (they added GDP of Ireland in last 3 months alone) and massive industrial and offshore industry experience



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Optimistic? Yup

    Achievable? Sure

    Likely? Maybe

    We can round back in 2030 to review.

    I do know that the majority of the groundwork has been laid to get things moving e.g. MAC, MARA, scaling up ABP, auctions, planning applications etc

    Will we hit 5GW by 2030, I'm hopeful, but time will tell.



  • Registered Users Posts: 843 ✭✭✭m2_browning


    What happens if we don’t and come 2050 we are left with a landscape of rusting broken wind generators out at sea whose lifespan was only two decades and a bunch of companies having to be bailed out repeatedly by state

    because that’s where this industry is heading now especially with high interest rates and zero native offshore industry

    Instead of starting a discussion now about nuclear in Ireland and having a plant built by 2040s which last us into 22nd century



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    If the financing of renewable energy companies worries you, then you really need to stay away from nuclear, the numbers are horrific. French taxpayers are on the hook for hundreds of billions of EDF's debt and its a complete clusterbuck that looks like its only going to get worse. EDF being the most experienced nuke operator in the world

    As for the rest

    1. nuclear is currently not permitted in Ireland
    2. there is sparse political support to change that
    3. there is little chance of a plant getting accepted in any region in the country by locals and there are few remote areas where both locals would not be impacted and it would be suitable for such a plant. You can thank our ribbon developments for that
    4. there are no politicians who would support a plant in their constituency as they would never get re-elected
    5. the economics are bonkers, simply bonkers.
    6. localities would have massive resistance to nuclear fuel and waste being transported through their areas
    7. the logistics and economics of waste storage alone make it unviable
    8. you can't have a single reactor, so double the cost as you would need at least 2 for when the inevitable emergency shutdown and extended maintenance occurs
    9. Shutdowns and maintenance periods are measured in months & years, not hours, days and weeks
    10. timelines for construction are measured in decades, not years
    11. risk of nuclear contamination ("this time it'll be different")
    12. as you mention, zero native experience, though I would find that a bigger concern in the nuclear field rather than offshore field

    There's loads more, but its all widely covered in the nuclear thread if you want to continue there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,698 ✭✭✭Shoog


    When you can show us a commercial fast breeder reactor you can crow, that's not disingenuous. The proof is always can it be brought to market - as yet the answer is a resounding no and since it hits massive security issues I doubt it ever will.

    Breeder reactors have been the saviour of nuclear ever since they were conceived - but haven't saved a damn thing because no one will **** well build one.

    It's a **** joke.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,610 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    It took 20 years to hit 5GW onshore. That was in the absence of significant supply chain issues or logistics of offshore delivery. There is zero chance we will see 5GW in 6 years time.

    Achievable = No

    Likely = 1-2GW (max)



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    We'll see, maybe I'm right, maybe you're right, we won't know for years either way



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,698 ✭✭✭Shoog


    This happened over a period in which the state virtually went bankrupt and furlowed just about every major project bar roads. They were ahead of the curve until the crash when things stalled for a decade. They also never put any pressure on Eirgrid to facilitate hookups which put the go slow on the whole industry.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,610 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    I'm directly involved in this space and have met most of the Phase 1 suppliers and project developers recently. They are all equally pessimistic. The earliest timelines for delivery have slipped closer to 2030 and are likely to slip further. That's even with the department underwriting every MW they produce, whether accepted onto the grid or spilled for constraint, curtailment or oversupply. They have a one way bet and even still are reluctant.

    So good luck with being right!



  • Registered Users Posts: 843 ✭✭✭m2_browning


    But climate change! If Ireland gets it wrong we would have to kill every cow in the country to satisfy the green tinged gods 🤣

    Otherwise we will burn 🔥 buuuuuuuurrrrrrnnn I tell ya

    am I doing it right?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,610 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Those windfarms were delivered by private entities and semistates (who apparently all have a remit to generate electricity) like Coillte, Bord na Mona, Bord Gais, Esb, mostly on a contested basis, ie they built their connections themselves for their commercial purposes. There was little thought for the end consumer or the environment, just revenue and profits. Why did it matter how much or how little the state had? If the projects were viable, they'd have been delivered.

    Plus, Eirgrid have sod all to do with construction, that's all ESB who are the Distribution and Transmission Asset Owner and have their own work culture. On top of that, all the commissioners were Esb until recently when they allowed some 3rd parties in but my understanding is that no project lay idle waiting for energisation, there were plenty of delays on the developer side too.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,698 ✭✭✭Shoog


    The auction for grid connection (often in very suboptimal locations) has represented de-facto brake on the renewables industry. Many projects didn't get built because there were no suitable connections offered.

    It is far from industry driven and far from optimal. If you look at how wind has been rolled out in the north you will see it clustered on the west coast where conditions are optimal. In the south it is distributed randomly across the country wherever the grid capacity was easiest to offer. It's been a catastrophy as a model with little strategic planning.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,610 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Those auctions had nothing to do with the delivery of renewables up to 2020. They are a recent invention by the Dept, which Eirgrid were instructed to implement.

    Northern Ireland is a very poor example. If you knew anything about the transmission system up there, you would realise there's a very strong 275kV ring around Lough Neagh and Belfast but very little grid support in the west, with just a single 275kV spur to Derry. The wind located in the west is the worst possible part of the network in NI and experiences considerable network constraints, especially since a lot of it was poorly planned and connected at Distribution level to expedite connection but then had no available transmission capacity.

    Next door in Donegal, we have similar levels of wind and connected in clusters at Mulreavy / Clogher, Meentycat etc. Given the weak nature of the grid in both regions, I'm not sure how you think NI is an exemplar?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,610 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    What REFIT auctions were allegedly responsible for being a defacto brake? What REFIT auctions specified locations for grid connections?

    The answer to both questions is none. Which coincidentally is the level of relevance in your statement to my post or what Shoog was trying to allude to.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    What other auctions are there that deal with renewables in Ireland? I'm only aware of REFIT & RESS



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,610 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    None. That's the point. Shoog suggested there was some sort of special auction raffling off grid connections in terrible locations for the period up to 2020, when there wasn't. Then you chimed in with some references to REFIT that had no relevance whatsoever to these fictional locational auctions.

    If either of you had mentioned the likes of Gate 3 (not an auction) which tried to bring some semblance of coordination to clustering projects and minimising stranded assets or inefficient grid development, you mightve had some credibility. Instead you decided to dilute the discussion with tangents and irrelevance.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You yourself called them auctions, hence the confusion. Say what you mean in future to avoid getting irritated by others misinterpreting your meaning



  • Registered Users Posts: 596 ✭✭✭deholleboom


    You are having arguments with the wrong person here. A big black hole where energy goes to die. He is not the only one but the most prolific poster that was one of the first of many ending up on my ignore list which is getting longer and longer. Engagement with this type of person is futile and only leads to irritation. Some people just dont realize how stupid they are. Some of them combine their stupidity with deliberate mis- and disinformation, pretending to have expertise and are basically bad faith manipulators. Put them on ignore and save yourself from exposure to all the bullshit..

    Post edited by deholleboom on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,610 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    I responded to Shoog explaining how the recent auctions he/she referenced had no influence on 2020 build out. Locational auction signals didn't happen back then.

    You then chimed in with incongruous rubbish about REFIT, which was a support scheme prior to RESS, but irrelevant to the discussion relating to locational signals. I explained how your post didn't support the argument, but now you are trying to make out that I somehow caused confusion when the only post that appears to be confused is yours.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,610 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Since you still haven't figured it out, REFIT never had any auctions. It was a scheme processed on date order (and qualifying criteria). I asked two questions to highlight the absurdity of your post by querying what "REFIT auctions" posed a de facto brake or specified locations for grid connections as claimed by Shoog. I then stated that the answer to both questions is "none" , because (a) there was no such thing as a "REFIT auction" and (b) no location specific auctions of any kind took place to encourage build out for 2020 targets. RESS was the first auction based approach for renewable support and is focused on 2030.

    You obviously have no clue about what you have posted and are now trying to brush it off with some lame Father Ted quotes. A simple admission that you were mistaken and just posted something for the sake of posting would get you a lot more kudos. Instead you'll no doubt chalk it down as another victory in disinformation, but woe betide any "denier" who posts something other than what a few climate disciples view as gospel.

    On the plus side, at least I didn't have to wait until 2030 to see you wrong on something.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I didn't realise the numbers working on wind were so high here at 5,000, and it looks like the numbers could double over the next few years. Awesome opportunity from the looks of it




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭KildareP


    Great. Let's say comparative numbers for an all-renewable grid. Pointing at the worst case numbers and going "Oooh, expensive!" when it somes no-one can (or will?) give comparative figures for even a best case all renewable grid is utterly meaningless.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,698 ✭✭✭Shoog


    The gates were a restriction on who could get a grid connection and they did restrict the amount of renewables which were allowed onto the grid. They also were only offered where the ESB had capacity, which as i said placed many projects in suboptimal locations.

    Any claims that the gate system was demand driven by the renewables industry is rubbish, it delayed projects in queues, and placed no pressure on the network to put capacity where it's was most efficient. It slowed down the roll out of wind and left ESB firmly in control of strategic planning with very little will to achieve the national goals.

    ESB/Eirgrid have been foot dragging since day one and the fact that buy back tariffs only arrived last year, a decade after the UK and most of the rest of Europe is testimony to their underlying attitude.

    Post edited by Shoog on


Advertisement