Irish Rail - Ireland's Latest Electricity Provider

Drimnagh Road

http://etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAY218576


Iarnród Éireann is a large consumer of electricity and is seeking to generate electricity on site from wind power, the user sites being RailwayStations and the wind turbines to be located in the car parks. It is envisaged that the Wind Turbine Installations will be of such a size and design as to qualify for a Planning Permission Exemption under .

Iarnród Éireann is now requesting potential suppliers of Small Wind Turbines (SWT) with a nominal power output in the range of 5kW to 10 kW, who have results proven under controlled test conditions, , to offer their product for consideration.

The contract will be of a “Turn-key” nature with the successful contractor providing the following:

• Verification of site suitability; from a civil, mechanical and electrical viewpoint.

• Supply of suitable wind turbines.

• Complete installation, including all civil works, mechanical and electrical works

• Commissioning

• Maintenance contract for a period of 10 years, with an option for a further 10 years…

Iarnród Éireann intends to issue a formal Tender Enquiry to suitable applicants and subsequently engage with one (or more or none, depending on the offerings) potential supplier to negotiate a contract for supply).

nanu nanu

Drimnagh Road wrote: »

http://etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAY218576


Iarnród Éireann is a large consumer of electricity and is seeking to generate electricity on site from wind power, the user sites being RailwayStations and the wind turbines to be located in the car parks. It is envisaged that the Wind Turbine Installations will be of such a size and design as to qualify for a Planning Permission Exemption under .

Iarnród Éireann is now requesting potential suppliers of Small Wind Turbines (SWT) with a nominal power output in the range of 5kW to 10 kW, who have results proven under controlled test conditions, , to offer their product for consideration.

The contract will be of a Turn-key nature with the successful contractor providing the following:

• Verification of site suitability; from a civil, mechanical and electrical viewpoint.

• Supply of suitable wind turbines.

• Complete installation, including all civil works, mechanical and electrical works

• Commissioning

• Maintenance contract for a period of 10 years, with an option for a further 10 years

Iarnród Éireann intends to issue a formal Tender Enquiry to suitable applicants and subsequently engage with one (or more or none, depending on the offerings) potential supplier to negotiate a contract for supply).

Watch out for that flying pig. It takes many years to get on the main grid. Irish Rail should tender for a peanut supplier.

Run_to_da_hills

When the wind dies down the Dart service ceases.:D

seanmacc

Dublin Port are also looking into this. Presently they have a couple of weather stations around the port to see if he turbines/solar panels would be viable. To be honest, with the amount of power they need these efforts are really just peeing into the wind.

timmywex

Nice idea but pretty pointless.

Wind only generates about 2W per square metre land, and even that only happens 21% of the time. In fact to deliver all of ireland's electricity demand from wind we would have to depopulate kerry, sligo galway & mayo and then fill them with turbines

SeanW

timmywex wrote: »

Nice idea but pretty pointless.

Wind only generates about 2W per square metre land, and even that only happens 21% of the time. In fact to deliver all of ireland's electricity demand from wind we would have to depopulate kerry, sligo galway & mayo and then fill them with turbines

Even then you would have to have a whole pile of fossil fuel fired power stations because the wind is not very reliable.

Because even Kitty can see this is retarded.

Drimnagh Road

timmywex wrote: »

Nice idea but pretty pointless.

Wind only generates about 2W per square metre land, and even that only happens 21% of the time.

Not to mention spoiling the landscape in some beautiful areas of the country, and causing a mudslide or two in the process. Nuclear for me, but that's for another board.

Chris_5339762

I wish the Irish would stop with this wind energy nonsense and build a few nuclear plants.

This is not a troll or to rise people, I'm deadly serious. These turbines are ugly, noisy, kill birds and are a total waste of money. Getting some nuclear up and running and stopping this ridiculous "No nuclear OR EVEN DISCUSSING IT" absolutely has to happen.

dermo88

Chris_5339762I wish the Irish would stop with this wind energy nonsense and build a few nuclear plants.

This is not a troll or to rise people, I'm deadly serious. These turbines are ugly, noisy, kill birds and are a total waste of money. Getting some nuclear up and running and stopping this ridiculous "No nuclear OR EVEN DISCUSSING IT" absolutely has to happen.

I have always regarded it as a form of a perverse anti-English agenda, that Ireland would rather cut its nose off to spite its face rather than copy anything or have anything they had. Nuclear plants being one aspect.

Of course, hindsight is a great teacher, and if the British, Japanese and Americans engaged in coverups, then I am sure Ireland would be even better at papering over any 'cracks' that might appear.

I am pro Nuclear power, and the scaremongering that goes on is based on the Chernobyl disaster, where a triumvirate of bad planning - such as an "open" reactor with a single containment structure, rigid communist mentality and not questioning orders lead to a disaster that will last far beyond our lifetimes.

It is horrendously unforgiving of errors, but it is efficient and when done right, its excellent.

But, we can only comprehend this in our lifespans of 70+ years. What happens to the waste in 700+ years?

As for wind power, I have to research more before I comment. Ireland seems ideal for it however.

Run_to_da_hills

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

I wish the Irish would stop with this wind energy nonsense and build a few nuclear plants.

I guess your answer would be "Not in my back yard" if the project was to be proposed close to your home town. :rolleyes:

dermo88

Carnsore point was supposed to be the site back in 1977. The phobia is caused by media hype over Windscale and Sellafield.

thebman

Wind energy is not the only "green energy".

Run_to_da_hills

dermo88 wrote: »

Carnsore point was supposed to be the site back in 1977. The phobia is caused by media hype over Windscale and Sellafield.

And rightly so, if it was Carnsore today we could add Chernobyl and Fukushima.

If it did go ahead and had a level 5+ accident it would take out much of the south east coast including Wexford and Waterford in high level fallout. The Wexford to Rosslare line would also be closed down for good.

Nuclear power has absolutly no place in a small country like Ireland..
.

mgmt

And Nuclear Power can not operate without government subsidies.



IÉ are planning to put in those small wind turbines that will produce basically nothing. If the planned sites are not in the open with no physical obstructions, turbulence will render the turbines useless. They can however claim to be a greener company, just like Diegeo who installed a token wind turbine at Guinnesses on the Quays.

dermo88

Run_to_da_hills


if it was Carnsore today we could add Chernobyl and Fukushima

Comparable circumstances do not exist at Carnsore in any way shape or form to Chernobyl or Fukushima. There are hundreds of reactors around the world operating safely today.

Such sentiments are symptomatic of an irritating brand of melodrama which is inappropriate at best. I'd have believed the hype from my childhood until my mid 20's. I'd tolerate a reactor within 15 kilometres of my home. By contrast, I could not tolerate a coal plant within the same proximity. 3 people have died so far due to the Fukushima reactor disaster, which was in the aftermath of an unprecedented Tsunami. How many have died in coal mining accidents.

The fear of Nuclear power is at a subliminal psychological level. The images of deformed childen, mental disabilities, bald heads, while terrifying are an indirect cause of a system that put guns before butter, steel before salami. That was communism, and Chernobyl is one of its more dire results.

We've got to get power somehow. We've got to develop new technologies. We've got to stick two fingers to the sheikhs in the Middle East with their hypocritical support of freedom. Its impossible to do, and Nuclear power, for all its failings is one tool in the triad that will reduce dependency on oil sourced from unstable nation states with oppressed citizens who are denied the very freedoms we have, financed by the very regimes supported by oil.

Choose....and choose wisely. No matter which way we look, there is a subsidy. Is it on the backs of slaves in a foreign land, or on the backs of taxpayers who can sustain it easier and ultimately benefit.

Run_to_da_hills

dermo88 wrote: »

Run_to_da_hills


if it was Carnsore today we could add Chernobyl and Fukushima

Comparable circumstances do not exist at Carnsore in any way shape or form to Chernobyl or Fukushima. There are hundreds of reactors around the world operating safely today.

Such sentiments are symptomatic of an irritating brand of melodrama which is inappropriate at best. I'd have believed the hype from my childhood until my mid 20's. I'd tolerate a reactor within 15 kilometres of my home. By contrast, I could not tolerate a coal plant within the same proximity. 3 people have died so far due to the Fukushima reactor disaster, which was in the aftermath of an unprecedented Tsunami. How many have died in coal mining accidents.

The fear of Nuclear power is at a subliminal psychological level. The images of deformed childen, mental disabilities, bald heads, while terrifying are an indirect cause of a system that put guns before butter, steel before salami. That was communism, and Chernobyl is one of its more dire results.

We've got to get power somehow. We've got to develop new technologies. We've got to stick two fingers to the sheikhs in the Middle East with their hypocritical support of freedom. Its impossible to do, and Nuclear power, for all its failings is one tool in the triad that will reduce dependency on oil sourced from unstable nation states with oppressed citizens who are denied the very freedoms we have, financed by the very regimes supported by oil.

Choose....and choose wisely. No matter which way we look, there is a subsidy. Is it on the backs of slaves in a foreign land, or on the backs of taxpayers who can sustain it easier and ultimately benefit.

Each nuclear accident brings along the same excuses from apologists. Chernobyl was caused by a stupid human error in a backward soviet block country and it could never happen again, Fukushima was caused by sizmic activity, this cannot possibly happen here, well we do have international terrorism and peoiple willing to crash aeroplanes into buildings. Also prople have also learned recently that all it takes to cause a nuclear catastriphe is to take out the plants cooling system.

Years ago I would envy countries like France, Germany and Japan for their high speed electric TGV's and Bullet trains etc, but now when I realise that all these countries are held to ransom by nuke power plants to run them I would be just as content to put up with what we have here.

popebenny16

Before this gets locked and/or moved to infrastructure:

we already use nuclear energy here, thanks to the interconnector. I would be happy with a reactor in ireland, and despite what rtdh says about terrorism and people crashing planes into buildings - since 2001 noone has crashed a plane into any power stations.

the reality though is that we cannot afford to build one, but we can lash up more interconnectors into the UK/EU grid and have enough power to electrify the railways.

n97 mini

Here's a better idea that would save more money:

All those train engines idling for hours in stations. TURN THEM OFF!

Or if IE prefer to leave them running then store the otherwise wasted energy in some sort of accumulator.

godtabh

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

When the wind dies down the Dart service ceases.:D

of course. all the leaves will be on the track by then

jonsnow

The ESB couldn,t operate the Inniscarra dam without flooding cork city. That whole mess was covered up as well.No way am I trusting them with a complicated nuclear plant.

dermo88

Run to the Hills

"Years ago I would envy countries like France, Germany and Japan for their high speed electric TGV's and Bullet trains etc, but now when I realise that all these countries are held to ransom by nuke power plants to run them I would be just as content to put up with what we have here"

In reply......trying my best here to restrain myself. Edit.....take deep breath, think logically.....here goes.

I don't know where to start, because I'll just end up having a cyberian loss of temper, and the moderator will need to intervene....AGAIN!!!!!

The world would be stuck with horse and carts if attitudes like this existed. We're just going to have to beg to differ. Frankly speaking, it appears like reactionary nonsense, pardon the pun.

I think the Japanese, the French, the Germans will put Fukushima behind them. How many died from smoke when we were using coal. Take the great smog of London in 1954. 4,000 died of respiratory problems that year.

No matter what happens, there is a price for progress. Our present stands on the shoulders of scientific giants. They took risks, generations later we reap the rewards.

If you and others are able to show me and convince me that science and experts are wrong in this regard, I'll pay attention.

Oil based wars are killing a lot more than any amount of uranium used for peaceful purposes can at present. Though......that can change unfortunately.

Otherwise, I'll have to agree to disgree.

jonsnow

dermo88 wrote: »

Run to the Hills



Otherwise, I'll have to agree to disgree.

I don't agree to that

OurLadyofKnock

Drimnagh Road wrote: »

Not to mention spoiling the landscape in some beautiful areas of the country, and causing a mudslide or two in the process. Nuclear for me, but that's for another board.

The northern slopes of the Ox Mountains in Sligo have been conpletely vandalised by these pieces of crap. A beautiful unpoilt landscape now destroyed.

No I know why it is called environmentalism.

Irish Rail should be tendering for trains not tokenist Green bull****.

mk6705

timmywex wrote: »

In fact to deliver aireland's electricity demand from wind we would have to depopulate kerry, sligo galway & mayo and then fill them with turbines

There are plenty of Dubs on this board (or indeed Corkognians from the real capital bai) who would have no problem advocating that .

Stonewolf

OurLadyofKnock wrote: »

Irish Rail should be tendering for trains not tokenist Green bull****.

Irish Rail have enough trains, they should be tendering for extensive trackworks.

DoesNotCompute

timmywex wrote: »

Nice idea but pretty pointless.

Wind only generates about 2W per square metre land, and even that only happens 21% of the time. In fact to deliver all of ireland's electricity demand from wind we would have to depopulate kerry, sligo galway & mayo and then fill them with turbines

Not such a bad thing :pac:

OurLadyofKnock

Stonewolf wrote: »

Irish Rail have enough trains, they should be tendering for extensive trackworks.

I meant trains as in train "SERVICES".

OurLadyofKnock

n97 mini wrote: »

Here's a better idea that would save more money:

All those train engines idling for hours in stations. TURN THEM OFF!

Or if IE prefer to leave them running then store the otherwise wasted energy in some sort of accumulator.

They actually use more fuel starting up again. Especially in the cold mornings. Idling disel engines are remarkable fuel effecient. It in only when they connect with the drive systems that the fuel consuption goes through the roof.


A train idling for 5 hours will use less fuel in that state and restarting from idle than a switched off diesel engine starting from OFF. There is also less wear and tear too.

I know it sounds weird but I had an engineer (DB and they know their stuff) who explained the science of it to me.

D'Peoples Voice

Drimnagh Road wrote: »

http://etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAY218576

Iarnród Éireann is a large consumer of electricity and is seeking to generate electricity on site from wind power, the user sites being RailwayStations and the wind turbines to be located in the car parks.

well if Dublin city council can use solar to power those onstreet parking meters
i guess it may be possible to use wind to power the street lights and ticket machines in the Irish rail car parks!
That said, I think money might be better spent subsidising private companies like "Euro Car Parks" to build multi-storey carparks so that there are enough spaces for people to park!
Compare the park and ride in Ballaly or Sandyford luas station to that of Malahide DART station:rolleyes:

Stonewolf

D'Peoples Voice wrote: »

well if Dublin city council can use solar to power those onstreet parking meters
i guess it may be possible to use wind to power the street lights and ticket machines in the Irish rail car parks!
That said, I think money might be better spent subsidising private companies like "Euro Car Parks" to build multi-storey carparks so that there are enough spaces for people to park!
Compare the park and ride in Ballaly or Sandyford luas station to that of Malahide DART station:rolleyes:

True, It's always mystified me why most train stations don't have a multistory built around them.

You never know, they might make a few bob off the parking ...

Cookie_Monster

Good idea, multiple small turbines all over the place is something that makes sense IMO. If every farm had one for example it provide decent power on average

Speaking of turbines I saw a load of them sitting in Dublin post this morning

Also drove past this recently: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fowler_Ridge_Wind_Farm
It just goes on and on and on, that's how to do it

Carawaystick

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Good idea, multiple small turbines all over the place is something that makes sense IMO. If every farm had one for example it provide decent power on average

Say there's no wind at all in Ireland for a week during the time of peak demand
just before xmas each year

like most of the last ten years

CIE

Drimnagh Road wrote: »

http://etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAY218576


Iarnród Éireann is a large consumer of electricity and is seeking to generate electricity on site from wind power, the user sites being RailwayStations and the wind turbines to be located in the car parks. It is envisaged that the Wind Turbine Installations will be of such a size and design as to qualify for a Planning Permission Exemption under .

Iarnród Éireann is now requesting potential suppliers of Small Wind Turbines (SWT) with a nominal power output in the range of 5kW to 10 kW, who have results proven under controlled test conditions, , to offer their product for consideration.

The contract will be of a “Turn-key” nature with the successful contractor providing the following:

• Verification of site suitability; from a civil, mechanical and electrical viewpoint.

• Supply of suitable wind turbines.

• Complete installation, including all civil works, mechanical and electrical works

• Commissioning

• Maintenance contract for a period of 10 years, with an option for a further 10 years…

Iarnród Éireann intends to issue a formal Tender Enquiry to suitable applicants and subsequently engage with one (or more or none, depending on the offerings) potential supplier to negotiate a contract for supply).

Uh-huh. Imagine the railway network much larger than nowadays, with several power plants (I'll leave power generation up to the imagination, but I used to live in a town with a hydroelectric dam), electrified and with regenerative braking feeding the grid additionally instead of dissipating heat into the atmosphere?

Over in Germany, they're looking at having Deutsche Bahn's many electric railway lines serve as a power grid. Would they ever think of such a thing in Ireland...?

Trampas

You flick your light switch and not happens but finally after 10 minutes the light comes on. Irish Rail will say the light came on in time

zagmund

To those who complain that turbines are ugly . . . have you ever considered how pretty a nuclear power station and all its associated facilities are ?

I know, I know, the one nuclear facility provides X million times more power that a few turbines, but regardless of that I think that making a pitch against turbines on the basis that they are ugly and spoil the views is stretching things just a little.

As I've said before here, if we don't innovate and put some work into development and new technology then development will stagnate and the incumbents will continue to be able to say that their technology is the only workable one. It's only by developing other solutions (initial revisions at first may be uneconomical, inefficient, etc . . .) that we can improve.

z

n97 mini

I read somewhere that currently in Ireland any output from wind that is fed into the grid has to have a matching amount of fossil power available on standby in case the wind suddenly dies down.

So if 20% of all power being consumed is from wind at any given time, the available online capacity has to be 120%, the difference being made up from fossils.

Capt'n Midnight

timmywex wrote: »

In fact to deliver all of ireland's electricity demand from wind we would have to depopulate kerry, sligo galway & mayo and then fill them with turbines

you say that like it's a bad thing

maybe we could try it out in Leitrim ?


Seriously the turbines go up on top of mountains, the blades are in clearer air higher up so animals can graze / people walk around them




But yes IR are green washing but their trains don't run all night so they can export power at night.

Capt'n Midnight

n97 mini wrote: »

I read somewhere that currently in Ireland any output from wind that is fed into the grid has to have a matching amount of fossil power available on standby in case the wind suddenly dies down.

So if 20% of all power being consumed is from wind at any given time, the available online capacity has to be 120%, the difference being made up from fossils.

regardless fossil fuel is saved

also the role of interconnectors is important in balancing loads over wide geograpical areas

and there is the old technique used in England where some companies get a preferrential rate if they agree to drop demand when asked.

spirit of ireland etc.

SeanW

zagmund wrote: »

To those who complain that turbines are ugly . . . have you ever considered how pretty a nuclear power station and all its associated facilities are ?

Oh, I don't know, THIS looks alright to me. Plus we wouldn't have to put it on an unspoilt mountain top.

As I've said before here, if we don't innovate and put some work into development and new technology then development will stagnate and the incumbents will continue to be able to say that their technology is the only workable one. It's only by developing other solutions (initial revisions at first may be uneconomical, inefficient, etc . . .) that we can improve.

Only that wind power - inherently by its nature - will NEVER circumvent the fact that it is literally as dependable as the wind. There will ALWAYS be a need to have full backup online at all times while a wind turbine is (and I use this term in the loosest possible sense) "working."

L1011

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

regardless fossil fuel is saved
.

Unless you want brownouts - its not. The 'backup' power stations need to be *running* because if the wind dies suddenly, you can't get fossil stations to start in a second.

n97 mini

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

regardless fossil fuel is saved

That's the point, it's not. The backup capacity has to be available in an instant should the wind suddenly die down.

Aidan1

It takes many years to get on the main grid.

Irish Rail don't need access to the transmission grid for turbines of this size. They're small domestic scale pieces that will be lost behind the meter - given the scale, they'll probably export little or nothing anyways - all output will be soaked up on site. Existing network connections should be plenty for these turbines.

Also, for the nth time, the Wind vs Nuclear argument is pathetic, uninformed and indicative of a deep lack of understanding of markets and of our ekectricty system. Nuclear = baseload, so in our case the only practical place for a nuclear plant is as a Moneypoint replacement (will need to be on stream in ~2025). Unless, of course, people want to shut down some new gas CCGT plant. There are a series of issues in our case around using nuclear, in that that our system is too small for present nuclear plants, the costs of building up to generating from nuclear power has profound regulatory and market implications, and the levelised costs of generation are not as low as even current gen gas plant (look at the situation EdF find themselves in in the UK market at present, or at Ollkilouto). All of these will change in time, and developing technologies in the nuclear area hold huge promise, but for the moment there are practical reasons why nuclear is a difficult fit for Ireland - the recent ESRI article even references this. Nuclear is not a deus ex machina/silver bullt type solution for us That said, a large scale build of nuclear in the UK (where they seriously need the baseload - they've a real problem towards the end of this decade if they don't) has huge advantages for us too.

In short, the argument about nuclear should be nuclear vs coal(possibly with CCS)/gas CCGT. However the persistent resurgence of 'nuclear' in debates about wind is interesting, if only for cultural reasons. There is a curious body of opinion that that paints nuclear as the obvious solution to our energy problems, and themselves as the white coated rationalists, bearing the flag of the enlightenment, doing battle against eeeee-vul green weenies, who 'know nothing about science/engineering/thorium reactors/third gen EBR/PWR' and continue to push wind as a solution - painting anyone who would challenge their narrow orthodoxy as somehow irrational, and distant from the cold hard facts. However, these champions are also singularly uninformed when it comes to the operation of electricty markets (even our own), and the manner in which different types of plant interact with them. And the fact that they continue to posit nuclear as an alternative to wind demonstrates that their motivation is not flowing from a rational understanding of electricity markets or from an analysis of future policy issues, but from something else. An (engineer) friend of mine suggests that it's down to the deep insecurity of some Irish engineers, who feel the need to have their own nuclear plant to play with in order to prove that they're just as good as their British or French colleagues. Ordinarily, I wouldn't be so unkind, but I'm starting to believe that he may have a point.

That's the point, it's not

Actually, it is. And in large quantities. The back-up capacity does not need to actually be spinning in a lot of cases - the TSO can forecast both demand and supply (from renewables) very precisely, and can match the two using the market mechanism (literally, how much capacity do they offer). Even when conventional plant is acting as a spinning reserve, it is still generating - often several plants are constrained down to minimum stable generation, so still running, still producing electricity, but ready to ramp up as and when wind gen drops.

The link below is good on the market effects of the above -
http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Statistics_Publications/Energy_Modelling_Group/Impact_of_Wind_Generation_on_Wholesale_Elec_Costs/Impact_of_Wind_Generation_on_Wholesale_Electricity_Costs_in_2011.pdf

Losty Dublin

MYOB wrote: »

Unless you want brownouts - its not. The 'backup' power stations need to be *running* because if the wind dies suddenly, you can't get fossil stations to start in a second.

The stations are running 24/7, they don't need to be fired up. My cousin in law works in an power station in the UK and part of his job is to watch out on TV and radio shows to anticipate demand. Anytime there are ad breaks in shows, half time or breaks in games or even cuts in signal it's literally a press of a button and the power is generated in seconds; that's how quick it can be.

Capt'n Midnight

MYOB wrote: »

Unless you want brownouts - its not. The 'backup' power stations need to be *running* because if the wind dies suddenly, you can't get fossil stations to start in a second.

Yes you are quite right. It takes 8-10 seconds to get power from pumped storage if you pre-spin the turbines. Otherwise it could take up to 60 seconds.

Capt'n Midnight

Losty Dublin wrote: »

it's literally a press of a button and the power is generated in seconds; that's how quick it can be.

Perhaps the interconnector to France is quicker than 8 seconds, (they usually are on phone and do a count down when transferring over power IIRC)

Don't forget too that a few seconds can easily be covered by the momentum in the spinning turbines and generators , though you may have to tweak the frequency to get the average back to 50Hz.



Or you could ask all the DART drivers to stand on the breaks when the wind dies so the regernerated electricity goes back in to the system :pac:

L1011

Losty Dublin wrote: »

The stations are running 24/7, they don't need to be fired up. My cousin in law works in an power station in the UK and part of his job is to watch out on TV and radio shows to anticipate demand. Anytime there are ad breaks in shows, half time or breaks in games or even cuts in signal it's literally a press of a button and the power is generated in seconds; that's how quick it can be.

By "running" in such a manner, they are consuming fuel even when no power is required.

A non-powered thermal fossil fuel plant takes extreme time to come up; a diesel or gas generator takes minutes to synchronise to produce clean power.

Capt'n Midnight

MYOB wrote: »

A non-powered thermal fossil fuel plant takes extreme time to come up; a diesel or gas generator takes minutes to synchronise to produce clean power.

Oddly enough the ESB and the people running windfarms have been known to check the weather forecasts and wind doesn't just stop ( unless you are in the eye )

L1011

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Oddly enough the ESB and the people running windfarms have been known to check the weather forecasts and wind doesn't just stop ( unless you are in the eye )

Wind can suddenly drop to too low a speed to run turbines, forecasts or not.

There will be brownouts unless you have stations sitting online as backup, no two ways about it.

n97 mini

I think the point is that wind capacity (as currently implemented) does not displace much fossil capacity, if any.

Heroditas

Aidan1 wrote: »

Irish Rail don't need access to the transmission grid for turbines of this size. They're small domestic scale pieces that will be lost behind the meter - given the scale, they'll probably export little or nothing anyways - all output will be soaked up on site. Existing network connections should be plenty for these turbines.

Exactly. They're small turbines which will be used to power the stations.
What they haven't mentioned is the fact that the payback for these turbines, due to where they will be located, will be in the region of a minimum of 30 years.

Cool Mo D

MYOB wrote: »

Wind can suddenly drop to too low a speed to run turbines, forecasts or not.

There will be brownouts unless you have stations sitting online as backup, no two ways about it.

Have you any actual evidence for this?

Wind is changeable, but not instantaneous by any means, especially averaged over thousands of turbines. The ESB has built a brand new fleet of very quick reaction gas turbine power stations that are perfectly well able to be used as backup with wind generation.