Myers: "Wind power will return us to the early Middle Ages"

Amtmann

SURELY the most moving sight in this Ireland of the Global Warming is the picket outside the power station in Lanesboro by Bord na Mona employees, demanding overtime payment for the period when the power station was closed for repairs and they weren't making their usual nighttime deliveries of turf.

Yes, they want to be paid for not having to get up in the middle of the night. Illogical? Quite the reverse, for the picket is every bit as logical as our overall energy policy, which is predicated on two very clear principles.

The first is to subsidise green-energy production, such as wind power, in order to reduce the production of greenhouse gases generated by fossil fuels.

The second is to subsidise the burning of the CO2-emitting fossil fuel peat, both to satisfy some ancient Fianna Fail instinct that the bog is pure, as well as to keep the Taoiseach's electors happy. Thus, a uniquely Irish tragedy, a Bord na Mona power station -- the unburnable in the unheatable.

Either way, the Government's electricity levy (€33 for homes, €99 for small businesses) is subsidising the two contradictory forms of energy. €78m underwrites uneconomic, wasteful, carbon dioxide-spewing, peat-burning power stations, while €43m goes to pious Rosary-muttering wind power.

And see that €33 per home? It's not really €33 at all. If you're like me, you're paying 56pc tax, which means that you have to earn €70 to be able to pay €33. The chances are that you'll have expended some more energy earning that €70. Which means that we are expending extra energy in order to keep an energy-inefficient, CO2-vomiting power station in service, even though we have been told by the European Commission to cut greenhouse gases by 20pc from 2005 levels.

Moreover, the Government has committed itself to making 30pc of our energy from 'renewables' -- which probably ranks alongside such well-seasoned commitments as draining the Shannon, restoring the Irish language and achieving national unity.

But surely, wind is the way forward? It certainly is -- forward to a winter in which the dolorous, the dim and the dumb die in the dark. Because if we'd depended on wind technology to stay warm last winter, we'd have all perished in the coldest spell in 150 years, during which there was more wind on the moon than here in Ireland.

You can check on the lack of winds these days yourself (Eirgrid.com), but let's take one day at random: August 8. That Sunday at 8.15am, wind power provided just seven megawatts of energy, against a forecast wind-energy supply of 58mw. So we were only getting some 12.5pc of expected wind energy, but our actual energy needs were 2,034mw. Wind was therefore supplying just 0.34pc of energy needs -- one third of one percent. Welcome to wind power and the early Middle Ages.

And yes, I'm all in favour of wind power, but it's a pious icing on the cake of the 24 x 365 substantive power that we actually need. And here in holy Ireland, the source for that may legally not be nuclear, according to one of those reflex spasms of parliamentary virtue which have generally characterised the workings of Dail Eireann.

Yet not long ago, a Green minister signed the agreement to import electricity from Britain, although this must inevitably must contain nuclear-generated elements.

But this sort of nonsense is not new. As far back as 1999, Emmet Stagg of Labour fretted about how it might be possible for us to buy electricity from Northern Ireland (which we did and do) without some of it being nuclear. Looking the gift horse in the mouth, he saw some troubling masonry beyond the molars.

"If this problem is not addressed, we will run into a stone wall," he prognosticated sagely, before asking of Mary O'Rourke: "How will the minister prevent nuclear power being generated here through the interconnector?"

The Deputy from Kildare presumably thought that the origin of electrons in a national power grid might be identified, possibly with tiny cattle brands, and Mary O'Rourke could sit astride the interconnector like a cowpoke at a corral, selecting the good electrons for virtuous Ireland and sending the nasty, nuclear electrons back to perfidious old Albion.

With such an uncertain grasp of both language and of science, no doubt we shall soon be demanding radiation-free, wind-powered X-ray scanners to be operated by our very own brand order of ecological nursing nuns, The Little Green Virgins of Perpetual Coitus.

BUYING Britain's surplus energy, which has been created by their nuclear industry, but then insisting that none of it is nuclear, is of course illogical, although it is consistent with a chronic dependency on Britain for lots of adult things, such as defence, abortions, television and emigration.

But then it's not particularly logical to make the generation of electricity by nuclear power a criminal offence, as we have done. And it is equally illogical to subsidise one thoroughly uneconomic energy-creating system, solely because it doesn't create any carbon dioxide, while subsidising another extremely uneconomic energy-creating system that produces vast amounts of the stuff.

Indeed, by such standards, those fine fellows in Lanesboro who are demanding overtime for staying in bed are the very embodiment of pure reason.

kmyers@independent.ie

- Kevin Myers

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-wind-power-will-return-us-to-the-early-middle-ages-2317876.html

Ash.J.Williams

What is it "you" are trying to say?

Amtmann

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

What is it "you" are trying to say?

"Who"? "Me"? "I" am simply highlighting an article that posters here may be interested in. If they are, they can talk about it. If they're not, they won't. Article threads are very numerous in this forum.

LeinsterDub

Kevin Myers master of the nonsensical infrastructure rant.

Cookie_Monster

that's quite a lot of words just to say nothing

Judgement Day

Kevin Myers used to be a thought provoking journalist when he wrote for the IT, but now that he is in tabloid land he seems to have lost the run of himself altogether. As somebody said about the late Conor Cruise O'Brien - like a lighthouse in a bog, brilliant but useless.

D'Peoples Voice

I think Myers is wrong about Irish People,
NIMBYism is what we care about.
The vast majority of us don't give a damn of the source of the imported electricity from the UK or from future interconnectors with France,
once its cheap.
Our main concern is that we are not living next to a nuclear station or an incinerator.
That is why we banned nuclear power, and why only hospitals etc have incinerators to date.
But it does make little sense to be subsidising inefficient peat stations when we could be importing cheaper more efficient electricity through more interconnectors with other countries.

ForiegnNational

D'Peoples Voice wrote: »

...and why only hospitals etc have incinerators to date.

I'm afraid that this is another illusion. Just as the CHASE group campaign against incinerators being built in Cork Harbour, they ignore the fact that each of the Chemical, Pharmaceutical and Biotech plants (that huge numbers of people work for and are therefore important to the economy) already have their own private incinerators burning toxic waste! (that is why they have them!)

If the "Green Party" had any real power, Bord na Mona would have been the first Government owned organisation/semi-state company, to have been closed the day they came to power. The fact that there are at least three peat powered electricity stations is simply a joke.

Oh, don't even get me started about the lack of facilities to handle recycling even though we all religiously sort our paper, plastic and coloured bottles (which by the way are all dumped in together in the waste handling site on Monahan Road in Cork).

No reflection on you D'Peoples Voice, but most of the population refuse to see the truth when it is sat fair and square in front of them!
</rant>

corktina

Ive long thought that wind power is far from green when you take into account the energy and materials used in the building of those quite enormous windmills. Ive also assumed it produces a tiny ammount of electricity. I had also thought that most recycled matrial I put in my bin goes straight to landfill.Good to know it isnt just me

We have a brand new recycling centre in Kanturk. It's been built a year or two now and is still to open as they cant afford the staff. Not only is it built in an extremely expensive way (do you need road markings in a council Yard for instance) but it is built on a greenfield site next to our beautiful river right at the start of the town where it is the first thing visitors see.

Green ideaology? PAH!

veritable

I'm all for renewable energy but we as taxpayers are being heavily exploited by the green lobby.
our taxes subsidize an industry that could not survive in the free market with it.
the reason that it would not survive is not because big oil would try to destroy it but because the green tech is mainly economically unviable. the technology produces either not enough power in total or not enough power when it's needed.
as regards the global warming arguement, it has been hypotesised that in order to cut down greenhouse gases to a safe level, all the economies in the West would have to switch off all electricity for a period of years. This means no cars, gas cookers and electricity. even if we wanted to become "greener", we are at the point of no return.
what we have now is different interest groups competing for tax payers' money - in the name of "going green" even though there is no hope of ever reversing our trend. it's a power grab and the green people are trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

SeanW

Kevin Myers often gets it wrong as he has done with the Metro, but in this case I must agree with everything he has written. Irish energy policy simply doesn't make any sense.

baalthor

Why the "early" Middle ages ?

It's not like there was a lot of electricity production at any time during the Middle Ages

FreudianSlippers

I disagree, we could produce more than enough power for the whole island and then some by wind energy alone in this country. With proper grid updates and links to the UK, the country could make money off of selling the excess energy to the UK and Europe.

Taxpayer owned green electricity production is the future whether we want to get in on it or not.

veritable

OisinT wrote: »

I disagree, we could produce more than enough power for the whole island and then some by wind energy alone in this country. With proper grid updates and links to the UK, the country could make money off of selling the excess energy to the UK and Europe.

Taxpayer owned green electricity production is the future whether we want to get in on it or not.

Well one thing's for certain. Taxpayer owned anything is most definitely not the future. Anything the govt touches almost always fails or costs far more than it would in the private sector.

FreudianSlippers

veritable wrote: »

Well one thing's for certain. Taxpayer owned anything is most definitely not the future. Anything the govt touches almost always fails or costs far more than it would in the private sector.

I tend to agree with that, but with energy it seems to work (see Norway).
It should almost certainly be partially taxpayer owned but almost certainly not government run.

LeinsterDub

veritable wrote: »

Well one thing's for certain. Taxpayer owned anything is most definitely not the future. Anything the govt touches almost always fails or costs far more than it would in the private sector.

Like how privatisation worked so well in the UK rail and bus network ? Or how Eircom improved the national telecoms backbone after being privatised ?

I don't think it's as black and white as you make it out to be.

corktina

OisinT wrote: »

I disagree, we could produce more than enough power for the whole island and then some by wind energy alone in this country. With proper grid updates and links to the UK, the country could make money off of selling the excess energy to the UK and Europe.

Taxpayer owned green electricity production is the future whether we want to get in on it or not.

AT what cost to the enviroment and economy of building them?

They use more resources building them and shipping them into the country than they would ever generate, not to mention the maintenace/renewal and the visual danage to the countryside.

mgmt

OisinT wrote: »

I disagree, we could produce more than enough power for the whole island and then some by wind energy alone in this country. With proper grid updates and links to the UK, the country could make money off of selling the excess energy to the UK and Europe.

Taxpayer owned green electricity production is the future whether we want to get in on it or not.

How exactly???

Wind power is unpredictable and more often than not produces next to nothing.

Why would a nuclear power like the UK or France buy Irish wind power when wind energy is so much more expensive.

mgmt

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Like how privatisation worked so well in the UK rail and bus network ? Or how Eircom improved the national telecoms backbone after being privatised ?

I don't think it's as black and white as you make it out to be.

Private industry built the railways in the UK and Ireland remember!!! What has CIE built???

FreudianSlippers

corktina wrote: »

AT what cost to the enviroment and economy of building them?

They use more resources building them and shipping them into the country than they would ever generate, not to mention the maintenace/renewal and the visual danage to the countryside.

Costs and environmental impact are going down. Plus, why not invest in the ability to make them here?!
The visual damage argument is nonsensical IMO. I find them beautiful additions. IMO that argument was garbage in Medieval times as much as it is today.

mgmt wrote: »

How exactly???

Wind power is unpredictable and more often than not produces next to nothing.

Why would a nuclear power like the UK or France buy Irish wind power when wind energy is so much more expensive.

http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=82838&CultureCode=en

mgmt

OisinT wrote: »

http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=82838&CultureCode=en

"Subsidizing renewable energy in the U.S. may destroy two jobs for every one created"
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a2PHwqAs7BS0

Wind Power has never closed a fossil fuel plant.
http://www.cepos.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/Arkiv/PDF/Wind_energy_-_the_case_of_Denmark.pdf

FreudianSlippers

mgmt wrote: »

"Subsidizing renewable energy in the U.S. may destroy two jobs for every one created"
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a2PHwqAs7BS0

Wind Power has never closed a fossil fuel plant.
http://www.cepos.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/Arkiv/PDF/Wind_energy_-_the_case_of_Denmark.pdf

I thought we were discussing Ireland? I don't care about US or Denmark wind production. We have possibly the strongest winds and waves on the planet and should be using these instead of burning oil and gas.

mgmt

OisinT wrote: »

I thought we were discussing Ireland? I don't care about US or Denmark wind production. We have possibly the strongest winds and waves on the planet and should be using these instead of burning oil and gas.

I was pointing out wind energy has not worked out well in Denmark where it produces Europes highest percentage. It also does not make financial sense either.

Look at todays wind power production. It is at a fraction of the theoretical maximum wind power installed (1731MW).

mgmt

OisinT wrote: »

I thought we were discussing Ireland? I don't care about US or Denmark wind production. We have possibly the strongest winds and waves on the planet and should be using these instead of burning oil and gas.

Wave energy is a pipe dream. The sea is too powerful and destroys any mechanism installed in it.

FreudianSlippers

mgmt wrote: »

Wave energy is a pipe dream. The sea is too powerful and destroys any mechanism installed in it.

The Oyster 2 has been quite successful as have the Wave Energy Converters in Portugal for the past 3 years. What about the tidal power being generated in Strangford Lough?

veritable

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Like how privatisation worked so well in the UK rail and bus network ? Or how Eircom improved the national telecoms backbone after being privatised ?

I don't think it's as black and white as you make it out to be.

It is black and white. Compare any business that started as a privately run company against any government run company.

The cases that you use are not valid. Both examples involve companies that the private sector inherited from the government.

mgmt

OisinT wrote: »

The Oyster 2 has been quite successful as have the Wave Energy Converters in Portugal for the past 3 years. What about the tidal power being generated in Strangford Lough?

hmm Strangford Lough is protected from the full forces of the sea. Besides limited number of places exist with a high enough tidal head to warrant a tidal turbine.

Oyster 2 hasn't been successful as it hasn't been launched yet. Pelamis failed.

LeinsterDub

mgmt wrote: »

How exactly???

Wind power is unpredictable and more often than not produces next to nothing.

Why would a nuclear power like the UK or France buy Irish wind power when wind energy is so much more expensive.

Not when combined with reservoirs which is what we should be doing

mgmt

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Not when combined with reservoirs which is what we should be doing

What the "spirit of Ireland"???

http://sustainability.ie/pumpedstoragemyth.html

LeinsterDub

veritable wrote: »

It is black and white. Compare any business that started as a privately run company against any government run company.

The cases that you use are not valid. Both examples involve companies that the private sector inherited from the government.

Enron V ESB?
Fox V BBC?

mgmt

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Enron V ESB?
Fox V BBC?

Strawman

LeinsterDub

mgmt wrote: »

What the "spirit of Ireland"???

http://sustainability.ie/pumpedstoragemyth.html

or not it would seem .

veritable

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Enron V ESB?
Fox V BBC?

I don't understand your point?

LeinsterDub

veritable wrote: »

I don't understand your point?

Never mind it's a different discussion.

veritable

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Never mind it's a different discussion.

I see what you're trying to compare. However poorly.

Fox is a economically viable business that runs on private money.
BBC is a business that survives because people who work in the UK have some of their money confiscated in the name of taxes to pay for it. The people who work do not have a choice in where this money goes nor do they have a say in how the BBC operates.

Enron is an example of a business that broke the law and went bust as a result.
ESB was created from tax payer's money. Taxpayers still pay money into this company. These taxpayers have no say in how the ESB is run or operated.

mgmt

veritable wrote: »

ESB was created from tax payer's money. Taxpayers still pay money into this company. These taxpayers have no say in how the ESB is run or operated.

and taxpayers are losing their ESB connections (900 a month) because the government are forcing surcharges to subsidise wind focking power.

oharach

veritable wrote: »

BBC is a business that survives because people who work in the UK have some of their money confiscated in the name of taxes to pay for it. The people who work do not have a choice in where this money goes nor do they have a say in how the BBC operates.

This is pretty judgmental language - are you opposed to publicly funded bodies entirely?

Is this ok?

The NHS is a business that survives because people who work in the UK have some of their money confiscated in the name of taxes to pay for it. The people who work do not have a choice in where this money goes nor do they have a say in how the NHS operates.

This?

Schools and universities are a business that survive because people who work in the UK have some of their money confiscated in the name of taxes to pay for them. The people who work do not have a choice in where this money goes nor do they have a say in how schools and universities operate.

Anyway, the BBC is not funded by 'people who work'=income taxes, it's a flat fee on anyone who chooses to own a television, and you can opt out of that if you really feel so aggrieved..

cnocbui

Nuclear power makes sense, wind power doesn't.

The contrast between the sheer emotional hysteria, mention of nuclear power has in this country, and the woolly headed wishful-thinking that attaches to wind power is just astonishing.

People are generally repulsed by the sensible proven technology while being strongly attracted to the one that is unreliable and illogical without the storage problem being solved.

There's an irony in there.

LeinsterDub

veritable wrote: »

I see what you're trying to compare. However poorly.

Fox is a economically viable business that runs on private money.
BBC is a business that survives because people who work in the UK have some of their money confiscated in the name of taxes to pay for it. The people who work do not have a choice in where this money goes nor do they have a say in how the BBC operates.

Enron is an example of a business that broke the law and went bust as a result.
ESB was created from tax payer's money. Taxpayers still pay money into this company. These taxpayers have no say in how the ESB is run or operated.

Back to my original point it's not black and white . You get some good companies and some terrible companies both public and private .

Zen65

veritable wrote: »

ESB was created from tax payer's money. Taxpayers still pay money into this company. These taxpayers have no say in how the ESB is run or operated.

Actually this is not correct. State Commercial companies such as EirGrid, ESB & BGE have never received equity from the government, they are simply owned by the state under licence. State commercial companies raise their own funds and yet pay dividends to the state. In reality, they have been a far better investment than the purchase of all those bank shares.

But back to Myer's argument about wind power. He states that wind generators are unpredictable, but this is not true. There are numerous methods of forecasting with fair accuracy the output from windfarms, which though only approximate, are good enough to plan the efficient operation of the grid.

The attached photo is from the EirGrid website for August 28th, but you will find many similar "good" forecasts.

We cannot rely entirely on any one method of electricity generation, whether that be gas, wind, hydro, nuclear or coal. Experience from world events tells you that a policy of enforced diversity is required for secure, reliable energy.

Cheers,

Z

kumate_champ07

wave energy is where its at. we are a country surrounded by an ocean with hundreds of miles of coastline. Ive heard theres some people working away at this idea quietly.

unit 1

Ok so it's Ireland and we want to build a nuclear power plant. So Anglo can finance it, Tom Parlon can build it, CRH can supply the concrete, Quinn can insure it, CIE can transport the raw materials and waste of course (by rail ), The ps unions can staff it (with Jack O Connor as shop steward), Bertie and Ivor can open it (twice), Michael O Leary can be headhunted to run it as MD, John Gormley can deal with the waste (in his incinerator), and Eamonn O Cuiv can locate it in a gaeltacht area to get the grants and make sure all the control manuals and buttons are in irish, and lastly Gaybo can look after safety. It's location of course will be kept secret to protect it from terrorist attack.

Question, would you buy a used nuclear power plant from any of the above?:D

mgmt

Zen65 wrote: »

But back to Myer's argument about wind power. He states that wind generators are unpredictable, but this is not true. There are numerous methods of forecasting with fair accuracy the output from windfarms, which though only approximate, are good enough to plan the efficient operation of the grid.

Huh, that is short term prediction. It takes days to shut down and restart power plants (and very expensive). What good is wind energy when you cannot rely on it? As I said before, wind power has never taken a fossil fuel or traditional power plant offline. Wind power is useless for baseload energy and equally useless for surge energy use. It is more expensive than any other form of energy and we have to subsidize its use through our electricity bills.

veritable

Zen65 wrote: »

Actually this is not correct. State Commercial companies such as EirGrid, ESB & BGE have never received equity from the government, they are simply owned by the state under licence. State commercial companies raise their own funds and yet pay dividends to the state. In reality, they have been a far better investment than the purchase of all those bank shares.

But back to Myer's argument about wind power. He states that wind generators are unpredictable, but this is not true. There are numerous methods of forecasting with fair accuracy the output from windfarms, which though only approximate, are good enough to plan the efficient operation of the grid.

The attached photo is from the EirGrid website for August 28th, but you will find many similar "good" forecasts.

We cannot rely entirely on any one method of electricity generation, whether that be gas, wind, hydro, nuclear or coal. Experience from world events tells you that a policy of enforced diversity is required for secure, reliable energy.

Cheers,

Z

Thanks for pointing that out to me about ESB. I just presumed they were companies like CIE, DUblin Bus, Iarn Eireann, etc - all costing the taxpayer 100s of millions annually.

veritable

unit 1 wrote: »

Ok so it's Ireland and we want to build a nuclear power plant. So Anglo can finance it, Tom Parlon can build it, CRH can supply the concrete, Quinn can insure it, CIE can transport the raw materials and waste of course (by rail ), The ps unions can staff it (with Jack O Connor as shop steward), Bertie and Ivor can open it (twice), Michael O Leary can be headhunted to run it as MD, John Gormley can deal with the waste (in his incinerator), and Eamonn O Cuiv can locate it in a gaeltacht area to get the grants and make sure all the control manuals and buttons are in irish, and lastly Gaybo can look after safety. It's location of course will be kept secret to protect it from terrorist attack.

Question, would you buy a used nuclear power plant from any of the above?:D

What's Michael o leary doing in the above list? he is a man who has an extensive track record of success

veritable

mgmt wrote: »

Huh, that is short term prediction. It takes days to shut down and restart power plants (and very expensive). What good is wind energy when you cannot rely on it? As I said before, wind power has never taken a fossil fuel or traditional power plant offline. Wind power is useless for baseload energy and equally useless for surge energy use. It is more expensive than any other form of energy and we have to subsidize its use through our electricity bills.

agree. if green energy was so reliable and good, then why does it require massive tax payer subsidies?

mgmt

Zen65 wrote: »

Actually this is not correct. State Commercial companies such as EirGrid, ESB & BGE have never received equity from the government, they are simply owned by the state under licence. State commercial companies raise their own funds and yet pay dividends to the state. In reality, they have been a far better investment than the purchase of all those bank shares.

It still takes up the public sector position on wages and benefits. The average salary being over 80,000euro. I wonder how much the state could have benefited if it was run efficiently...

And why does eiregrid see fit to advertise. It serves no purpose only to waste money as it does not serve the public.

veritable

mgmt wrote: »

It still takes up the public sector position on wages and benefits. The average salary being over 80,000euro. I wonder how much the state could have benefited if it was run efficiently...

And why does eiregrid see fit to advertise. It serves no purpose only to waste money as it does not serve the public.

don't mean to keep quoting you but well said again. it's not just the cash cost of the govt companies, it's the opportunity cost of what the taxpayer could have spent his money on if taxes weren't so high to pay for these bloated and inefficient companies.

unit 1

veritable wrote: »

What's Michael o leary doing in the above list? he is a man who has an extensive track record of success

He'd make sure the waste would all fit into overhead storage on his planes (after being weighed of course), and fly it to somewhere nobody can find.:D

Zen65

mgmt wrote: »

Huh, that is short term prediction. It takes days to shut down and restart power plants (and very expensive).

Ahh, not any more. Modern gas turbines are very quick to start up - even combined cycle units are much quicker than the old thermal boiler/steam turbine plants.


Z

Zen65

mgmt wrote: »

And why does eiregrid see fit to advertise. It serves no purpose only to waste money as it does not serve the public.

I don't understand this either, they don't compete for customers, so advertising is a bit redundant isn't it?

Z