Energy infrastructure

Ultimanemo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120063195#Comment_120063195

Dish washer and washing machine always between 11 pm and 8 am, but stir fries are not healthy, and that is what I mean, I shouldn't do something that is not healthy or doesn't suit just to avoid the premium rate between 5 and 7 pm, something I can avoid simply by refusing to install a smart meter

Ultimanemo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068545#Comment_120068545

You remind me of a joke a green guy went to Japan said to a Japanese crowd: vote green and they will solve all your energy problems, a Japanese: but we don't have energy problems, the green: vote green and you will

Ultimanemo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068545#Comment_120068545

He will tax them

Birdnuts

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067712#Comment_120067712

Will make FA difference anyways such is the nature of wind energy

bk

“Dish washer and washing machine always timed for 11 pm to 8 am, still electricity bill is painful”

But you only benefit from cheaper rates doing that if you are on a plan that has cheaper rates at those hours. Usually either a night rate meter or a smart tariff. Otherwise you are paying the same to use these at this hour, then earlier in the day.

“something I can avoid simply by refusing to install a smart meter”

Sure, no one is forcing it on you, but in the end you may end paying more then if you were on a smart meter plan and still cooked during the evening. Specially if you end up eventually getting an EV. If you charge your EV over night and run the dishwasher and washing machine at the same time, then you will almost certainly have cheaper bills with a smart plan, even with cooking at 6pm.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068545#Comment_120068545

Err, you know that the minister could only use these powers with the consent of the cabinet?

it isn’t like the minister could just use them unilaterally without cabinet approval.

You know this is how our government works and is totally normally?

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120073677#Comment_120073677

Errrr where does it say that in the article? Unless the articles wrong:

“The legislation will give the minister the authority to control the supply and distribution of oil if there is national crisis due to dwindling resources.

This will include the minister being able to determine how much diesel or petrol people can be given at service stations.”

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120073711#Comment_120073711

It's no different to the powers granted to the Health Minister during covid, all of which had to be signed off by the cabinet each time something was done under those powers.

These powers do not grant him carte blanche without checks

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120073725#Comment_120073725

That’s fair enough but it doesn’t mention that in the article unless I missed it?

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120073728#Comment_120073728

It was an article from the Independent though; circumspection is advised.

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120073819#Comment_120073819

So can someone link to where it shows ER needs acceptance from the cabinet before he deems rationing of diesel and petrol is needed.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120073952#Comment_120073952

No one has seen the relevant legislation to enable this, he has to bring the legislation to cabinet before he can publish it. That's literally the first line of the article. The idea that a cabinet dominated by FF and FG, under a FG Taoiseach, would sign off on legislation to give a green minister (or ANY minister, including their own, for that matter) powers they can use unilaterally without getting the ok from cabinet is ridiculous.

Once it's published, it will then be debated on in the Dail. If it survives that process, it'll go for a vote. If it is adopted, the minister will still need Cabinet approval to do. The greens would need to be in power on their own to use this power as you seem to be suggesting, and while I think that the greens will do better than many are currently predicting at the next election, it is not going to be the largest party in the state.

Once you get past the conspiracy theories of Ryan rationing fuel to car owners, you get to the meat of the issue, does the government need the ability to ration who gets what fuel? Personally, not sure we'll ever get to the point that we'd need it, but I do see the need. Imagine a situation where chronic fuel shortages hit Ireland, should the government be able to commandeer fuel for Public Transport? Ambulances? Should people with huge fuel tanks be able to suck up loads of fuel, or should there be a mandated restriction so you can only get say, 20 litres or so, allowing more people to continuing driving in an emergency?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120074237#Comment_120074237

I'd wager if these powers were going to a FFG minister nobody would bat an eye but attach ER to it and all of a sudden it becomes a conspiracy

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120074367#Comment_120074367

I would be of the opinion no single minister should have the ability to make such a decision without reaching a unanimous decision with a committee first.

You posted a link on the other thread saying he had now received approval to publish this new bill.

https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/d33c9-new-bill-to-strengthen-states-capacity-to-manage-oil-supplies-receives-government-approval/

So the next step, according to cat in a box, is for this bill to be debated in the Dail.

You say (cat in a box) if it survives this process and if it’s voted in he’ll still need approval to ration fuel- but how does that make sense if the bill is about giving one minister the power to ration fuel?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120074980#Comment_120074980

Look up how it was done for the Health Minister during covid and you'll find the answer

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120074995#Comment_120074995

It’s not the same.

ER has a vested interest in lowering diesel and petrol usage does he not?

If he has the power to decide there is an emergency in the amounts of diesel and petrol we have in reserve who decides on the level that emergency can be called at? 50 days reserve? 60 days reserve? What incentive would he have to lift the emergency?

This might sound like a conspiracy theory but there’s a clear vested interest here.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075098#Comment_120075098

This might sound like a conspiracy theory

Indeed it does

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075123#Comment_120075123

So there’s no vested interest in the minister who wants to get rid of fossil fuels having the power to ration fossil fuels?

bk

I’m sorry tom1ie, but this is a weird conspiracy theory you have gone off with!

If a minster did what you are suggesting, going against what the cabinet wanted, then he or she would simply be replaced as minister by the government.

You mention there should be a “committee” who signs off on it, there is, it is called the cabinet.

In Ireland, government ministers are collectively responsible for government actions. Each minister is responsible for his departments actions. The Department Of The Environment has responsibility for petroleum and regulating our energy market. Thus any laws relating to these areas will naturally come from this department and relate to this department. New laws like this will be worked on by civil servants in the department and once done, brought forward to cabinet for review by the minister with responsibility for the department.

This is literally the job of each department and the job of each minister to represent their department in the wider cabinet. After all, it wouldn’t make sense for the dept of health to develop laws on energy security or vice versa!

This is all completely normal and how our government works. In the end no major decisions are taken without cabinet approval.

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120078787#Comment_120078787

only seeing this now as it wasn't quoted.

Your probably right BK but the way that article is wrote makes it sound like a power grab on behalf of the minister- from the article:

The minister will set out how the laws will work in practice and how quickly they can be deployed in the case of an oil emergency.

The legislation will give the minister the authority to control the supply and distribution of oil if there is national crisis due to dwindling resources.

This will include the minister being able to determine how much diesel or petrol people can be given at service stations.

However, the exact details of what he would do in the case of an emergency are not set out in the legislation.

Instead it gives him the legal authority to decide how resources should be managed.

There is no mention in the article of the minister being answerable to a committee (the cabinet) once these laws have been approved?

Your right- if the minister started rationing fuel left right and centre he could be removed by the rest of the cabinet- but then again if the law states he has this power (if the bill is approved) how could it be justified to remove that minister?

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120084563#Comment_120084563

Again, we haven't seen the text of the legislation, but they're all written the same way, with the section on how the law is used basically being a copy and paste from existing laws.

The Taoiseach doesn't need to have a reason to remove someone, there's basically no employment law for politicians at that level. They could be fired for extremely personal reasons and there's no come back other than in the court of public opinion. Any minister that did something controversial without cabinet approval would be out within the hour, and honestly, the media and political analysts wouldn't bat an eyelid at it.

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120084563#Comment_120084563

I think you answered your own question when you point out "the way the article was written". It's the Independent, most "articles" are click-bait. You simply cannot take them at face-value and believe that they are trying to give you a complete representation of the facts.

plodder

As far as the law is concerned a minister can sign a statutory instrument (regulation) without consulting the cabinet, though in many cases such SI's can be overturned subsequently by resolutions of the Oireachtas. It's all spelled out in the primary legislation that the SI arises from.

Politically, no minister is going to enact significant regulations without consulting the cabinet first. As someone said above, it would just mean the minister being replaced. So, the reason for this is just to be able to act quickly in a time of crisis, without having to recall the Dáil.

specialbyte

Your probably right BK but the way that article is wrote makes it sound like a power grab on behalf of the minister- from the article:

You're right the article is written to make it sound like the media's bogeyman Eamon Ryan is trying to grab power. Ask yourself why that might be?

cnocbui

Sun-Cable, a company that was supposed to create the world's largest solar energy production and distribution network, has been placed into receivership. It was proposing a vast area of solar panels in northern Australia to feed green energy to Singapore via a 4,000+ km interconnector.

Apparently the Singaporeans weren't interested as there are cheaper, more local sources of energy.

https://www.straitstimes.com/business/sun-cable-enters-administration-firm-has-mega-project-to-supply-solar-power-to-s-pore-from-australia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120098820#Comment_120098820

Your conclusion is incorrect based on the article you linked

The Australia-Asia Power Link (AAPowerLink) project aimed to meet up to 15 per cent of Singapore’s power needs when it was to be completed by 2029, Sun Cable said recently.

The project has been closely watched in Singapore. The Government has said that large-scale green energy imports are one of the key ways Singapore can reduce its dependence on fossil fuels and cut emissions to meet the nation’s net-zero target by 2050.

A key part of the project’s success was the signing of deals to buy green electricity in Singapore.

In October 2022, Sun Cable said it would supply a total of 1.75 gigawatts (GW) of power in Singapore. The firm said it had received expressions of interest from corporate buyers in Singapore for more than 2.5GW, illustrating strong interest in green energy supplies.

Apparently the issue at hand appears to be a disagreement between the 2 billionaire backers

Hinting at disagreement between its key shareholders, Sun Cable said: “While funding proposals were provided, consensus on the future direction and funding structure of the company could not be achieved.”

Australian billionaires Andrew Forrest and Mike Cannon-Brookes were key backers of the project, which had raised A$210 million in capital in 2022.

Mr Cannon-Brookes, Sun Cable’s chairman, voiced support for Sun Cable in the statement, which contained no comment from iron ore magnate Forrest’s privately owned Squadron Energy, Sun Cable’s other big stakeholder, further suggesting disagreement between the billionaires.

Did you mean to link a different article because your conclusion doesn't, in any way, align with the content of that article

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120098852#Comment_120098852

Not my conclusion. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-06/sun-cable-project-sparks-doubts-over-singapore-market-interest/101026162

Can we agree that the project has collapsed and that the company set to deliver it has been placed in receivership?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120098895#Comment_120098895

Ah so there was a different article, cheers for the clarification

Can we agree that the project has collapsed and that the company set to deliver it has been placed in receivership?

Thats what the article says, yes

RetroEncabulator

This is a bit of a concern in terms of ever becoming dependent on a French interconnection:

Rumblings about France exiting the European energy market proposed by the far left and supported by aspects of the centre right.

We need energy independence as an island and any interconnection as a back up.

I wouldn’t like to see Ireland taking extreme nimbyism positions that put us at the whim of someone else’s (often turbulent) politics.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/electricity/news/defiance-grows-in-france-against-eu-electricity-market/

There’s a broader debate going on in France about a return to the days of fully integrated, state owned energy supply under EDF, which had a structure very similar to ESB before liberalisation of the market.

So I wouldn’t get too excited about the interconnection being anything but a load balancer.

marno21

Interesting stat. Wind energy production in 2022 would have required burning 1.65bn worth of gas were it produced in that way.