Poolbeg Incinerator

PaulieC

I think it's quite an impressive building



I am ambivalent about everything else about it though, from the way it was approved in a shambolic sort of way to the output of its chimneys.

Effects

odyssey06 wrote: »

How are they supposed to know it is steam?
They dont know it is steam... they expect most of those things at a port. They probably don't expect whats looks like a smoking power plant.

Have you ever been to any other ports anywhere else in the world?

odyssey06

Rooting around the official site I found this:
https://www.covantadublin.ie/About-the-Facility/How-Does-the-Facility-Work

Steam from the process is cooled, condensed back into water and returned to the boiler tubes, making it an efficient “closed loop” system.

Can someone explain then why the stacks are emitting steam if it's supposed to be a closed loop system???

Also, the website mentions that the incinerator uses "auxiliary fuel" to get the system up to 850 degrees for combustion... anyone know what this auxillary fuel source is???

odyssey06

Effects wrote: »

Have you ever been to any other ports anywhere else in the world?

I don't recall my view of Nice port being obscured by a constant steam\smoke stacks output...

Alun

odyssey06 wrote: »

I don't recall my view of Nice port being obscured by a constant steam\smoke stacks output...

The 'port' in Nice is basically a marina plus a berth for passenger ferries, cruise ships and floating gin palaces, not a commercial port in the sense that Dublin Port is. Not comparable at all.

odyssey06

Alun wrote: »

The 'port' in Nice is basically a marina plus a berth for passenger ferries, cruise ships and floating gin palaces, not a commercial port in the sense that Dublin Port is. Not comparable at all.

It will be when we move Dublin Port to Drogheda (ahem, sorry Balbriggan) and replace it with the nice looking marina though

odyssey06

OSI wrote: »

Or, just send the cruise liners to Dun Laoighre. Much more scenic, train right beside the marina, no incinerator, and we don't have to spend billions and cause massive disruption to the economy because you're worried a yank will get upset at the sight of a cloud.

Sorry what will additional billions be spent on and what is causing massive disruption to the economy???

A planned longterm switch to a new port - no reason for massive disruption.

No additional billions being spent - assuming there will be large developments in Dublin and environs for additional residential and commercial properties, the question is whether it makes more sense to place them where the port is or place them outside Dublin and then having people commute in from the environs.

TheChizler

odyssey06 wrote: »

Rooting around the official site I found this:
https://www.covantadublin.ie/About-the-Facility/How-Does-the-Facility-Work

Steam from the process is cooled, condensed back into water and returned to the boiler tubes, making it an efficient “closed loop” system.

Can someone explain then why the stacks are emitting steam if it's supposed to be a closed loop system???

Also, the website mentions that the incinerator uses "auxiliary fuel" to get the system up to 850 degrees for combustion... anyone know what this auxillary fuel source is???

The steam generated directly by the boiler needs to be condensed after passing through the turbine before it can be returned to the boiler (closed-loop). The steam you see is exhaust from a secondary system heated by the condenser, and this system is open-loop.

odyssey06

OSI wrote: »

You reckon moving the entire infrastructure that encompasses Dublin port, updating all navigation and traffic management systems associated with getting naval traffic in and out of a port, all the legal resources including customs and coast guard and then completely gutting and rebuilding the entire port area as residential can be done for free and over night? Even moving just the fuel depot would be a monumental time and financial cost.

Where did anyone say it could be done over night??? Please find me that reference either in this thread or in any articles that were referenced about moving the port.

Nothing I have heard so far counts as 'massive disruption' to the economy in my book. I don't see it impacting growth %, GDP etc

Moving a fuel depot would be predicated on it being at worst a cost neutral move (although one would reasonably expect it to be revenue generating) ... the land it is sitting on is worth a factor of X (ten?) more than its destination land.

How does any city ever move to a new port if all the steps you have listed are insurmountable?
How does any new port ever become operational?
If Copenhagen et al can do it, Dublin should be able to also if it makes sense to do so.

Now maybe it made sense for those cities to move their port, and for specific reasons it wouldn't make sense for Dublin.
And maybe, even if it would make sense, we just don't think we have the wherewithal to pull it off...
But disagree with what's being proposed not a strawman version of it.

alastair

odyssey06 wrote: »

Where did anyone say it could be done over night??? Please find me that reference either in this thread or in any articles that were referenced about moving the port.

Nothing I have heard so far counts as 'massive disruption' to the economy in my book. I don't see it impacting growth %, GDP etc

Moving a fuel depot would be predicated on it being at worst a cost neutral move (although one would reasonably expect it to be revenue generating) ... the land it is sitting on is worth a factor of X (ten?) more than its destination land.

How does any city ever move to a new port if all the steps you have listed are insurmountable?
How does any new port ever become operational?
If Copenhagen et al can do it, Dublin should be able to also if it makes sense to do so.

Now maybe it made sense for those cities to move their port, and for specific reasons it wouldn't make sense for Dublin.
And maybe, even if it would make sense, we just don't think we have the wherewithal to pull it off...
But disagree with what's being proposed not a strawman version of it.

It would obviously cost billions. And you're still left with a local location for the generating and sewage treatment location for Dublin. White elephant comes to mind.

Effects

odyssey06 wrote: »

I'm glad to hear it's steam coming out of it but not smoke - I'm not sure how the lay person is supposed to realise that though.

Maybe do a bit or research? Do you expect someone to call over to you and explain everything you don't understand?

OnDraught

Moving the port makes loads of sense in fairness to the op. There's thousands of homes being touted for the glass bottle site. Building a massive incinerator right beside it was a stupid idea.

A few high rise apartment buildings would have been highly desirable on that site.

K.Flyer

But why should they?
Ferry and freight ports are what they are, they are not generally designed to be pretty.
As already said above, if its a concern for tourism then have them develop Dun Laoghaire for the cruise ships, everyone knows the town's economy could do with the business.

OnDraught

K.Flyer wrote: »

But why should they?
Ferry and freight ports are what they are, they are not generally designed to be pretty.
As already said above, if its a concern for tourism then have them develop Dun Laoghaire for the cruise ships, everyone knows the town's economy could do with the business.

Why would a tourist want to be left in Dun Laoghaire for the day? I wouldn't be too happy if I was left in a suburban town while on a cruise.

There's no need to have a freight port smack bang in the middle of a city that is expanding all around it. It's a prime area to throw up accomodation that's close to the IFSC and Grand Canal Dock. Progress or something like that.

Alun

OnDraught wrote: »

Why would a tourist want to be left in Dun Laoghaire for the day? I wouldn't be too happy if I was left in a suburban town while on a cruise.

They can easily hop on a Dart to Dublin if they want. Not too different to landing in Dublin port and having to be transported to the city centre in a bus/coach I'd have thought.

OnDraught

Alun wrote: »

They can easily hop on a Dart to Dublin if they want. Not too different to landing in Dublin port and having to be transported to the city centre in a bus/coach I'd have thought.

They just hop on the Luas from the Port which brings them straight to the Guinness Storehouse which is where they all go anyway. 15 minute journey. Getting from Dun Laoghaire Dart station to the Guinness Storehouse could take the guts of an hour if you have to walk from town.

I'm assuming a lot of you have never been in the area the port is in?

Markcheese

The figures for the incinerator are gonna need some serious sifting through.. The amount of power it creates from waste sounds great, till you start factoring in the extra fuel needed to get the temperature up..
. . And how much of the waste that fuels it could have been recycled, which isn't the same as waste...
. . Incidentally I think the best place for a city incinerator is in the city.. It'll be watched/monitered more..
. And if it's mass burning the cities residual waste, unsorted I don't see how it'll know what it's emissions will be and whatever ash that's left over will have to be treated as possible toxic waste..

testaccount123

OnDraught wrote: »

I'm assuming a lot of you have never been in the area the port is in?

I suspect a lot of posters on this thread dont live in Dublin.

odyssey06

OnDraught wrote: »

They just hop on the Luas from the Port which brings them straight to the Guinness Storehouse which is where they all go anyway. 15 minute journey. Getting from Dun Laoghaire Dart station to the Guinness Storehouse could take the guts of an hour if you have to walk from town.
I'm assuming a lot of you have never been in the area the port is in?

The Luas is a long unpleasant walk from the cruise and ferry terminals.

OnDraught

odyssey06 wrote: »

The Luas is a long unpleasant walk from the cruise and ferry terminals.

Not from where the cruisers dock though. No?

I can't imagine there's too many foot passengers on the ferries.

Alf Veedersane

Markcheese wrote: »

The figures for the incinerator are gonna need some serious sifting through.. The amount of power it creates from waste sounds great, till you start factoring in the extra fuel needed to get the temperature up..
. . And how much of the waste that fuels it could have been recycled, which isn't the same as waste...
. . Incidentally I think the best place for a city incinerator is in the city.. It'll be watched/monitered more..
. And if it's mass burning the cities residual waste, unsorted I don't see how it'll know what it's emissions will be and whatever ash that's left over will have to be treated as possible toxic waste..

It's likely to be more financially beneficial to waste operators to separate out recyclables as much as possible. Recyclables are largely exported anyway.

I'm not sure how much toxic waste you think there is going to be but it's likely to be such a low level that it would meet the criteria for landfill as is the case with the incinerator in Meath. The fly ash and boiler ash is treated as hazardous material and is exported. It's mostly solidified and buried in salt mines.

The alternative is to build more landfill capacity or export increasingly large quantities, which goes against the principle of self sufficiency.

Alf Veedersane

OnDraught wrote: »

Why would a tourist want to be left in Dun Laoghaire for the day? I wouldn't be too happy if I was left in a suburban town while on a cruise.

Tourists aren't left in Dun Laoghaire. They're brought in to waiting coaches and brought off to places like Glendalough etc.

Markcheese

Markcheese wrote: »

The figures for the incinerator are gonna need some serious sifting through.. The amount of power it creates from waste sounds great, till you start factoring in the extra fuel needed to get the temperature up..
. . And how much of the waste that fuels it could have been recycled, which isn't the same as waste...
. . Incidentally I think the best place for a city incinerator is in the city.. It'll be watched/monitered more..
. And if it's mass burning the cities residual waste, unsorted I don't see how it'll know what it's emissions will be and whatever ash that's left over will have to be treated as possible toxic waste..

None of the waste going to the plant is recyclable, and if it is you can thank the good citizens of Ireland for not sorting their waste. Nothing that would have been recycled otherwise is going to be incinerated.

I dunno what you mean by your last point. It knows what its emissions are because they are constantly monitored.

alastair

OnDraught wrote: »

Not from where the cruisers dock though. No?

I can't imagine there's too many foot passengers on the ferries.

Smaller cruise ships dock right up at the toll bridge, so a short walk to the Luas. Bigger ones dock in Ocean Pier - involving exiting through the warren of port roads. In both cases though, there's usually shuttle busses laid on by the cruise operators to move people to the city centre or further afield tourist attractions.

odyssey06

OnDraught wrote: »

Not from where the cruisers dock though. No?
I can't imagine there's too many foot passengers on the ferries.

The ferryport is further in, but at least has the occasional #53 bus.

I think it'd be at least 20 minutes from the cruise docking for the larger ships and I wouldn't be keen on walking around the port area at the same time as trucks were coming in\off a ferry.

Some info here on a previous thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=103794459

odyssey06

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Tourists aren't left in Dun Laoghaire. They're brought in to waiting coaches and brought off to places like Glendalough etc.

I think they'd have to pay extra for those kind of excursions though? Probably the majority do but if they didn't fancy \ didn't want to stump up for a day trip, they are left to their own devices either on board the cruiser or in the vicinity of where they've docked.

odyssey06

odyssey06 wrote: »

I think they'd have to pay extra for those kind of excursions though? Probably the majority do but if they didn't fancy \ didn't want to stump up for a day trip, they are left to their own devices either on board the cruiser or in the vicinity of where they've docked.

Yeah, that's generally how cruise companies operate.

This has nothing to do with the waste incinerator.

alastair

odyssey06 wrote: »

if they didn't fancy \ didn't want to stump up for a day trip, they are left to their own devices either on board the cruiser or in the vicinity of where they've docked.

Beside the dart that gets them into the city centre in 25 minutes, with a picturesque route thrown in for good measure?

killbillvol2

This thread is generating far more waste than the incinerator.

K.Flyer

OnDraught wrote: »

I'm assuming a lot of you have never been in the area the port is in?

I worked on a maintenance contract in the petroleum storage depots for years and still travel through the area on a regular basis. So I know it well enough.

K.Flyer

odyssey06 wrote: »

I think they'd have to pay extra for those kind of excursions though? Probably the majority do but if they didn't fancy \ didn't want to stump up for a day trip, they are left to their own devices either on board the cruiser or in the vicinity of where they've docked.

Thats how things are done.
Pay for the excursion if its not included, or go walk-about under your own steam, or stay on board ship, choice is yours.
Btw, on an average day at the wrong time it could take up to 40mins from where the cruise ships dock to Guinness' with traffic congestion.

K.Flyer

As far as the incinerator is concerned, it has been in planning since 1997, so nobody can say they didn't know about it.

Alf Veedersane

odyssey06 wrote: »

I think they'd have to pay extra for those kind of excursions though? Probably the majority do but if they didn't fancy \ didn't want to stump up for a day trip, they are left to their own devices either on board the cruiser or in the vicinity of where they've docked.

How many cruise ships dock less than half an hour from the city centre though?

rameire

the moving of the fuel depot alone is costed at around 250 million.
in addition to that, take the fuel out of Dublin means tankers will have to travel twice the distance to Dublin Airport.
Dublin Port is not going to be moved in the next 50 years.

odyssey06

Interesting study from 2006 found that:
"The council's study said that relocation of the port would be the best option for the future of the area in terms of housing and social needs, the local and national economy and the environment. Relocation would also be the best option for the efficiency of port operations and for the growth of its market in exports and imports."

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/plan-to-move-dublin-port-meets-wide-approval-1.917114

So we've lost ten years already!

rameire

https://player.vimeo.com/video/228684709

For a Steamy ISFW video click above.

Its all about Steam at the Poolbeg Incinerator.

alastair

rameire wrote: »

https://player.vimeo.com/video/228684709

For a Steamy ISFW video click above.

Its all about Steam at the Poolbeg Incinerator.

Good to know Al Pacino's brother is looking after things there.

Markcheese

Beatrice Large Serfdom wrote:

I dunno what you mean by your last point. It knows what its emissions are because they are constantly monitored.

Well, different chemicals need different temps to burn effectively and cause least pollution, and people often chuck any old thing into their rubbish, light bulbs batteries, cleaning products paint, what ever... So controlling the mix will be nigh on impossible... And controlling or predicting the emissions even more so.. And I doubt their permanently testing for everything..
Incidentally if incinerating sorted recyclables stops them going to a landfill (because of price or whatever) then I've no prob with it..

Markcheese

Markcheese wrote: »

Well, different chemicals need different temps to burn effectively and cause least pollution, and people often chuck any old thing into their rubbish, light bulbs batteries, cleaning products paint, what ever... So controlling the mix will be nigh on impossible... And controlling or predicting the emissions even more so.. And I doubt their permanently testing for everything..
Incidentally if incinerating sorted recyclables stops them going to a landfill (because of price or whatever) then I've no prob with it..

This is all addressed. It burns at a minimum of 850C. All that's left at those temps are ash and whatever metals are in the rubbish. Emissions ARE monitored on a permanent basis, you can doubt it all you like but they are. Burning rubbish is not some sort of unsolved or experimental problem, loads of countries have been doing it for years. This isn't even the first incinerator in Ireland, how much do you hear about the other one?