[article]More renewables headed for EU

SeanW

From RTE:

European Union nations have committed to a binding target of 20% for the use of renewable fuels such as wind and solar power by 2020.

The EU heads of government meeting in Brussels agreed to the common energy policy today.

The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, whose government holds the rotating EU presidency, described the agreement as ambitious and credible.

It is understood the deal allows flexibility in how each member country contributes to the target as part of a strategy to cut EU greenhouse gas emissions.

There had been strong opposition from some countries, such as Poland, to the proposal.

The deal will mean that European homes, offices and streets will have to use energy-efficient lighting by the end of the decade.

The leaders asked the executive European Commission to come up with proposals for saving power in office and street lighting by 2008 and in homes by 2009.

Yesterday, the heads of government agreed to slash carbon dioxide emissions by 20% - also by the year 2020.

EU leaders were set to endorse a plan for bio fuels to make up at least 10% of vehicle fuels by 2020, but differ over how to open electricity and gas markets to more competition.

Brian Cowen, Minister for Finance, attended the summit along with Taoiseach Bertie Ahern and Foreign Affairs Minister Dermot Ahern. He said the deal recognises that not everyone is starting from the same position.

Fair dues to the EU. This should put some fire under the backsides of the dozy, clueless gombeen government that managed to screw things up so badly here (like letting the sugarbeet industry die, and paying wind-down money when we so badly need nonfossil liquid fuels) also noted on the TV version that France got nuclear power into the agreement as a solution

About time we saw some action.

piraka

According to Bertie, it is achievable. I don't know how we are going to achieve through renewables. I suppose we can buy more carbon credits.

is_that_so

Given that this thread is about renewables and there is a piece in today's Irish Times on it ( sorry only print edition - page 2) , the Marine Institute Strategy is interesting reading. The testing site mentioned was where the Wavebob test took place last year. No idea what happened to that test and the website is still "under construction". The current test is being conducted by Ocean Energy Limited from Cobh.

I find myself agreeing with Bertie on this, if we can sort out plastic bags this is achievable.

piraka

I don't know where they are going to put all the wind turbines. As at the end of the piece on the news, they said that there will a lot more arguments (on planning).

is_that_so

Turbines will prove a problem and will encounter serious difficulties with nimbyism but offshore sites , such as Arklow and Clogherhead are an option. Airtricity have a map of all current sites. Other renewables may not be such a serious issue, e.g. miscanthus and other bio-crops but the question is how quickly we get up and running on all of it. Talking of targets is good but we do need to accelerate our adoption of that talk.

Keeks

piraka wrote:

I don't know where they are going to put all the wind turbines. As at the end of the piece on the news, they said that there will a lot more arguments (on planning).

The problem is not where to put them.....its about getting a grid connection. There are loads of projects held up because they can't get connected to the grid

is_that_so

Where exactly is the blockage? I was under the impression that the ESB has to take energy into the grid.

piraka

That's true. Saw a planning application yesterday, re submitted after issue in 2002 for a wind farm. Re-sumitted because they still haven't got a grid connection. :rolleyes:

kerrymaninld

Another issue that might arise is that when planning permission is granted for large turbines this right expires after 18-20 years (correct me if I am wrong).

The oldest turbines in Ireland are now up that long, so retention will have to be applied for.

I'd hazard a guess that there will be more objections...

magicbastarder

is_that_so wrote:

Where exactly is the blockage? I was under the impression that the ESB has to take energy into the grid.

the arklow bank wasn't developed to the intended extent as the ESB claimed it'd have to have an excessive number of power stations on standby - if there was a lull in the wind, you'd have brownouts.

2 stroke

Where exactly is the blockage? I was under the impression that the ESB has to take energy into the grid.

The problem lies in getting power form your nice windy sparsly populated area to a suitable spot to tie into the grid. (usualy a substantial sub station). this could involve 10 miles or more of underground cable through private property.

SeanW

BTW Bmcclurg, Did you sign up just to spam avocalite.ie?

Looks like my initial post here was a little optimistic. There may be more renewables headed for the EU but there's also more coal.

From Der Spiegel: Caught in the Climate Change Conundrum: Germany Plans Boom In Coal-Fired Power Plants, Despite High Emissions

OOPS!!!

This might be of interest to the anti-nukes in this forum (eh hem ... Lenny, Lou.M?) since it shows beyond doubt what happens in a Coal v Nuclear situation when someone says "no nuclear" And the Germans are like world leaders in environmentalism. And here some people accused me of beating a straw man. Go figure.