Wind Farms

Fuzzy Clam

nice_guy80 wrote: »

one nuclear plant in the UK would produce the same amount of electricity, for Britain

If you want nuclear power and the potential hazzards and long term implications.

Fuzzy Clam

Awakening2014 wrote: »

I don't think Britain will be needing our power anyway.

So why are they doing this???

Fuzzy Clam

Awakening2014 wrote: »

By the way Fuzzy Clam what is your vested interest. No one cares about windfarms unless they have a soul and hate them or are getting money from them.

None. Do I need a vested interest to have an opinion or is your mind so limited in it's capacity as to understand that some people actually don't find this as big as a problem as you make it out to be?

You really are an idiot. I've just demonstrated to you that i neither hate them NOR am i getting money from them which just proves your last sentence to be stupid (like you).

Fuzzy Clam

Awakening2014 wrote: »

If you want to cross me that's your prerogative. Live by the sword be prepared to die by it too.

LOL:D

Fuzzy Clam

A Primal Nut wrote: »

They are definitely not cheaper, they are being heavily subsidised by our electricity bills. In order to operate they require large amounts of reliable energy produced by fossil fuels as an input. Then they produce highly irregular electricity which is very expensive to work smoothly into the grid.

The practical benefits (turning off other forms of energy) are nil. They are there to make politicans look good.

Any type of electricity production needs to be regulated smoothly to be introduced into the grid.

Fuzzy Clam

Greensleeves wrote: »

Do people really think that it's a good thing to cover 5 counties with giant wind turbines just to fill the coffers of greedy businessmen?

No I don't. But at least your post isn't littered with anti Brit crap.

Fuzzy Clam

Awakening2014 wrote: »

Just cause they messed up our economy and ancestors does not mean they messed up our soul. I'm afraid the days of rule are coming to an end.

I'm getting a bit fed up with trying to make sense of your posts but what do you mean by this?

esox28

The no windturbine campaign always reminds of the time when the two cooling towers in Rhode were scheduled to be demolished, there was a save the cooling towers outcry from locals. As we all know these esb station raped the natural resources of our country side with little or no taught for the future.

My point being is 'if you build them people will come' in other words we would grow to love them "mark my words"

Would we rather a nucular plant across the water in Cornwall because it not outta the question of Britain to build another.

These turbines are monsters granted but thats a good thing the higher the better, great feats of engineering so what if the energy is exported might stop a few of our sons being exported to Britain.

They are enviro friendly and generate no waste, I don't know the exact percentage but a good portion of our electric comes fr natural gas which is piped from Russia, it really only takes one war for the Russians to shut the valve off.

The turbine electric doesn't always have to go off shore, there on our island which we control.

Any way my final taught is we can always cut them down in the end and bring them to Hammond lane for scrap, did I mention they are fully recyclable apart from foundations.



I have no vested intrest in windturbine project proposed, I love my home town mullingar.

Regards

nice_guy80

esox28 wrote: »

The no windturbine campaign always reminds of the time when the two cooling towers in Rhode were scheduled to be demolished, there was a save the cooling towers outcry from locals. As we all know these esb station raped the natural resources of our country side with little or no taught for the future.

My point being is 'if you build them people will come' in other words we would grow to love them "mark my words"

Would we rather a nucular plant across the water in Cornwall because it not outta the question of Britain to build another.

These turbines are monsters granted but thats a good thing the higher the better, great feats of engineering so what if the energy is exported might stop a few of our sons being exported to Britain.

They are enviro friendly and generate no waste, I don't know the exact percentage but a good portion of our electric comes fr natural gas which is piped from Russia, it really only takes one war for the Russians to shut the valve off.

The turbine electric doesn't always have to go off shore, there on our island which we control.

Any way my final taught is we can always cut them down in the end and bring them to Hammond lane for scrap, did I mention they are fully recyclable apart from foundations.



I have no vested intrest in windturbine project proposed, I love my home town mullingar.

Regards

Yes, I would rather a nuclear power plant in Cornwall
at least then Britain would be generating their own electricity and ruining their own countryside

instead of ruining the Irish countryside with huge turbines.

you might live in Mullingar town, but these turbines will be in rural areas, near people's houses.

esox28

From the farm, building beside proposed development.

You would prefer nucular next door?

Have you seen Chernoble?

ted1

esox28 wrote: »

From the farm, building beside proposed development.

You would prefer nucular next door?

Have you seen Chernoble?

Chernobyl is completely different. It was an old designed underfunded soviet plant. Anyone who brings it up in a pro/anti nuclear conversation clearly has no idea about how nuclear technology has moved on

Markcheese

"Yes, I would rather a nuclear power plant in Cornwall
at least then Britain would be generating their own electricity and ruining their own countryside"


And have no economic activity here, I don't get the objection to the things because the power is for export, almost all our farming activity is for export,most factories are exporting ... The only thing we don't want to have to export is our people .... Which if they don't have jobs ...

nice_guy80

Markcheese wrote: »

"Yes, I would rather a nuclear power plant in Cornwall
at least then Britain would be generating their own electricity and ruining their own countryside"


And have no economic activity here, I don't get the objection to the things because the power is for export, almost all our farming activity is for export,most factories are exporting ... The only thing we don't want to have to export is our people .... Which if they don't have jobs ...

what 'economic activity' is going to be generated here? seriously

the wind turbines won't even generate sufficient energy!

Greensleeves

About 2,000 people attended the protest against windfarms in Mullingar last month according to the Westmeath Examiner.

'Not in our area' say 2000 at Mullingar windfarm protest
Saturday, 27th July, 2013

An estimated 2000 people marched through Mullingar today, and vowed that they will continue their fight against windfarms until the issue goes away.
...
While the atmosphere was cheery, there was a palpable passion among the participants, who applauded loudly as the speakers called for a moratorium on wind farm development until independent scientific and environmental studies on potential detrimental effects have been carried out.

Sean Casey, a former Westmeath footballer, told the crowd that the wind companies are now trying to offer financial inducements to GAA Clubs and to the Westmeath County Board, but that he would be fighting to have the GAA turn down any offers of "dirty money".

http://www.westmeathexaminer.ie/news/roundup/articles/2013/07/27/4016901-not-in-our-area-say-2000-at-mullingar-windfarm-protest/

Greensleeves

Wind energy may not be as "green" as we have been led to believe...

Unsustainable wind energy not an alternative source of energy

Irish Examiner, Thursday, June 27, 2013
By Peter Crossan

"I have been opposing wind farms for the past 14 years, and I am an environmentalist with a long track record on environmental issues. So the immediate question arises, as to why I should be opposed to wind energy, which is viewed as being “green and sustainable”?

This really goes to the heart of the question, and why wind energy cannot be described as an alternative source of energy — very simply, because it is not a predictable source. Wind blows intermittently, not on demand, so it is therefore unpredictable, and must be backed up by conventional power plants.

This is described as “spinning reserve”. What this term means is that conventional fossil fuel plants are kept idling when wind energy is available on the national grid, so that they can be cranked up when the requirement arises. This idling of plants generates greater levels of carbon dioxide emissions, and also the requirement to have conventional plants on standby that continue to run regardless of whether wind generated power is coming onto the grid. This cancels out the so-called carbon dioxide savings.

It also makes no sense from a cost point of view, nor does wind energy which is heavily subsidised, with all customers paying a tariff on their domestic and industrial bills, a situation that has seen us now being the second dearest country for electricity prices in the eurozone."

http://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/agribusiness/unsustainable-wind-energy-not-an-alternative-source-of-energy-235292.html

Greensleeves

And the economic case for wind turbines is not great either according to the economist Colm McCarthy...

No commitment to wind export plan until a full analysis of the costs and subsidies is available:

Colm McCarthy, 22 June 2013, Farmers Journal

"Community groups, particularly in the midlands, have been organising objections to further wind-farm developments, arguing that modern wind turbines are visually intrusive, damage wildlife and create noise pollution.

These are important matters but there is a more fundamental objection to further wind-farm development. Ireland already has substantial installed wind capacity and it is not obvious that there is an economic case for burdening the system with more.

Wind power is unreliable - intermittent generation produces power unpredictably. For every unit of wind capacity, a standby unit must be available, since the wind unit will generate power for only about one hour in three, and virtually the entire wind generation capacity can sometimes be idle.

Since the availability of the wind units can be predicted accurately only for short periods ahead, standby units, typically gas-fired, must be constantly in readiness - this is costly."

Full story...
http://www.farmersjournal.ie/site/farming-No-commitment-to-wind-export-plan-until-a-full-analysis-of-the-costs-and-subsidies-is-available--17072.html

Zubeneschamali

Greensleeves wrote: »

conventional fossil fuel plants are kept idling when wind energy is available on the national grid, so that they can be cranked up when the requirement arises. This idling of plants generates greater levels of carbon dioxide emissions, and also the requirement to have conventional plants on standby that continue to run regardless of whether wind generated power is coming onto the grid. This cancels out the so-called carbon dioxide savings.

This is what is technically known as bull. The man's a spoofer.

tuds2013

Go to Spain, Austria or any other European country,they have wind farms and nobody says boo about them. Stop looking for something to give out about and go for a walk or something

kjkkments

It seams to me that that there are three options for energy production at the moment which one would the people of westmeath prefer given the choice.
Traditional fossil fuels coal, peat, gas (too much smoke and traffic ) usual arguement.
Nuclear(waste for to be stored for thousands of years and chance of explosion if not properly managed and maintained)
Wind power.(ugly and ruins the view)
Best option seams to be none of the above no waste no smoke and no turbines spoiling your view down side is we will just have to get by with out electricity and we can all go back to the 1800's should suit everyone just fine.

ted1

kjkkments wrote: »

It seams to me that that there are three options for energy production at the moment which one would the people of westmeath prefer given the choice.
Traditional fossil fuels coal, peat, gas (too much smoke and traffic ) usual arguement.
Nuclear(waste for to be stored for thousands of years and chance of explosion if not properly managed and maintained)
Wind power.(ugly and ruins the view)
Best option seams to be none of the above no waste no smoke and no turbines spoiling your view down side is we will just have to get by with out electricity and we can all go back to the 1800's should suit everyone just fine.

Your missing pumped hydro, solar to a lesser extent and in time tidal.
Our fuel mix is extremely poor and the reliance on wind isn't helping in lowering pricing.
With regards fossil fuel, using carbon capturing techniques we could get over the issue of emissions for the moment.
But we're still left with having little energy security as we would need to import our coal and oil.

nice_guy80

we should build more hydro electric dams up in the mountains and valleys where nobody lives, like in New Zealand

that would lessen the need for wind turbines or fossil fuel power plants in Ireland

nice_guy80

nice_guy80 wrote: »

we should build more hydro electric dams up in the mountains and valleys where nobody lives, like in New Zealand

that would lessen the need for wind turbines or fossil fuel power plants in Ireland

Bloody long transmission lines!:rolleyes:

kjkkments

ted1 wrote: »

Your missing pumped hydro, solar to a lesser extent and in time tidal.
Our fuel mix is extremely poor and the reliance on wind isn't helping in lowering pricing.
With regards fossil fuel, using carbon capturing techniques we could get over the issue of emissions for the moment.
But we're still left with having little energy security as we would need to import our coal and oil.

None of these have a resonable power output for investment the efficiency of solar power is less than 10% in sunny areas I can only imagine what it would be here. Tidal is promissing but not realistic for westmeath. Fuel mix is poor wind power does represent another option that will have to be used in conjunction with existing sources it is complimentary not a replacement. The natural resources me do have is wind and we refuse to use it so in short we are sc*****.

ted1

kjkkments wrote: »

None of these have a resonable power output for investment the efficiency of solar power is less than 10% in sunny areas I can only imagine what it would be here. Tidal is promissing but not realistic for westmeath. Fuel mix is poor wind power does represent another option that will have to be used in conjunction with existing sources it is complimentary not a replacement. The natural resources me do have is wind and we refuse to use it so in short we are sc*****.

Wind can not produce base load energy. So we will always need to build in spare capacity for when the wind stops or have rolling blackouts.
Tides are predicatable and can be forecasted years on advance allowing us to plan our energy supply.
Unless you can provide a citation for your 10% claim on solar I'm calling your bluff.

kjkkments

ted1 wrote: »

Wind can not produce base load energy. So we will always need to build in spare capacity for when the wind stops or have rolling blackouts.
Tides are predicatable and can be forecasted years on advance allowing us to plan our energy supply.
Unless you can provide a citation for your 10% claim on solar I'm calling your bluff.

As I said wind is complimentary to traditional sources. Yes tides are predictable but critically unharnessed and at present it produce's very little except for a few experimental projects that are far from comercial. Effeciency of multi layer multi junction solar pannels is 40% however these are only used on spacestations and satellites where photo radiation is much greater than on the crust. The greatest effecincy achieved on the surface of the planet is 15% achieved on an equatorial noon in a desert. Typicaly efficiency at this latitude with the prevailing cloud cover in this country is much less if anything I was being generous claiming 10%. Off the top of my head these are the numbers google it if you like.

Marooned75

Does anybody here realise over all yer arguments for and against wind turbines that these are being built to meet England's needs not Ireland's.If they ever get built.

kjkkments

Marooned75 wrote: »

Does anybody here realise over all yer arguments for and against wind turbines that these are being built to meet England's needs not Ireland's.If they ever get built.

I think it has just expanded into a wider discussion on renewables in general but I would say that the electricity will just be pumped into the national grid and transmitted from same to the UK I cant imagine they will build a separate interconnector just for this. Just my opinion maybe someone who actually knows the infastructure could weigh in here.

ted1

kjkkments wrote: »

I think it has just expanded into a wider discussion on renewables in general but I would say that the electricity will just be pumped into the national grid and transmitted from same to the UK I cant imagine they will build a separate interconnector just for this. Just my opinion maybe someone who actually knows the infastructure could weigh in here.

They are planning 2 new interconnecters especially for these. Prevents them feeding into our grid which can cause delays as they need to apply for a gate, then when they do get a gate connection they will have to go through The SEMO.

There was a memorandum of understanding signed which will allow the UK to claim carbon credits for elec generated here.

ted1

kjkkments wrote: »

As I said wind is complimentary to traditional sources. Yes tides are predictable but critically unharnessed and at present it produce's very little except for a few experimental projects that are far from comercial. Effeciency of multi layer multi junction solar pannels is 40% however these are only used on spacestations and satellites where photo radiation is much greater than on the crust. The greatest effecincy achieved on the surface of the planet is 15% achieved on an equatorial noon in a desert. Typicaly efficiency at this latitude with the prevailing cloud cover in this country is much less if anything I was being generous claiming 10%. Off the top of my head these are the numbers google it if you like.

Are you forgetting that wind energy is actually an offshoot of solar energy. Wind is formed by the uneven heating of the earth. I remember reading a paper that says wind uses 1% of solar energy, with that in mind you can say the theoretical efficiency of wind is .59%

kjkkments

ted1 wrote: »

Are you forgetting that wind energy is actually an offshoot of solar energy. Wind is formed by the uneven heating of the earth. I remember reading a paper that says wind uses 1% of solar energy, with that in mind you can say the theoretical efficiency of wind is .59%

Well you could also say that fossil fuel is solar energy as the sun made the plants that fed the animals that died millions of years ago and turned into coal oil and gas. 100% renewable energy problem solved.