Energy infrastructure

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118535380#Comment_118535380

That video claimed Ireland's cattle herd was 'nearly' 7m. I believe it's 6.7m in 2020. Importing feed needs some explaining as that doesn't seem to me to constitute emissions. If that feed is grain, then it's sequestered carbon, most of which is turned into cow and is not being re-emitted as methane, just as with the grass.

So if the original claim I quoted from Alps is correct, 6.7M head of cattle, are sequestering a net 41.54mt of carbon annualy, allowing for the CO2 equivalent of the methane they emit. ((9-2.5)*6.7E6)

That 41.54 of net anunally sequestered CO2 almost exactly balances the claimed worst case emissions in your screenshot - fancy that.

As for drained peaty soils. Let me know when the Dutch have agreed to knock permanent holes in their dykes and the Germans have re-flooded all their reclaimed lands.

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118538201#Comment_118538201

By my estimates around 14 years.

Sam Russell

Mod: Can we keep politics for the Politics forum, and not bring it into this thread. Post deleted.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-60112018

Eirgrid may lose a lot of control over NI subsidiary. They will challenge it. Hopefully it won't affect the all-island infrastructure.

tom1ie

This whole scenario with Russia potentially constraining the supply of gas to Europe or turning it off is showing the need for an LNG terminal to be built in Ireland.

Are there any plans for this?

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118540367#Comment_118540367

Tried once and rejected. Trying again.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/energy-and-resources/shannon-lng-to-seek-approval-to-build-650m-gas-plant-in-kerry-1.4654412

"However, Minister for the Environment Eamon Ryan said last May that it would not be appropriate to proceed with any LNG terminal here, including Shannon, pending the outcome of an energy needs review, due to be finished next year."

I suspect we would be tied to US fracked gas with this proposal. Which, while not ideal, would be preferable to piped Russian or Qatari LNG.

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118540667#Comment_118540667

Yeah but the issue is the UK.

We can’t directly use the LNG as we don’t have an LNG terminal.

So in this scenario we are depending on the UK to behave!

Not good.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118540857#Comment_118540857

The plan is to double down on more wind and hence require more gas as backup and more interconnectors

Right now when there's enough wind we only use gas for up to 25% of demand or to meet grid stability requirements for high inertia devices. Turlough hill and the new Synchronous Compensator (and Silvermines) would eat into that 25% too. As would CHP and Waste to Energy and Hydro etc.

For the upfront price of one nuclear power plant we could increase wind fivefold which means that 75% target would be reached on much calmer days.

The interconnectors are being rolled out anyway. 2.2GW would mean they could cover minimum demand with existing storage and existing non-wind renewables for short periods without needing gas. And as minimum demand is roughly half of peak demand that means that even in winter we wouldn't need gas once there was any sort of wind blowing.

Interconnectors work both ways and England is absolutely dependent on imported electricity just ask Scotland and France.

Solar is as cheap as chips and we'd only need a small fraction of the 12,000Km2 of bogs to meet annual needs if storage was cheap enough. Summer is easily sorted.

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118541283#Comment_118541283

We will always need gas for heating though.

Not having an LNG terminal in Ireland, considering we are at the end of the pipeline is insane!

Markcheese

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118538201#Comment_118538201

Surprisingly it could be done quite quickly - there is a proposal to put a floating LNG terminal just behind corkbeg island at the whitegate oil refinery - it's already on the gas grid - right next to almost a gw of electricity generation , near a connection to the disused ballycotton gas field which could be used for summer storage , there'd be a foreshore license or something needed , but probably little objection because it's next to the refinery in a ( beautiful ) area set aside for heavy industry ..

Markcheese

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118541371#Comment_118541371

You'd have to commit to a long term contract , no one is going to build one on a whim , and it's going to be more expensive gas than a pipeline - at a time when we're planning on reducing our gas use ...

I assume there'll be huge Europeanoney going towards reducing European Russian dependence on Russian Gas , so pipelines from north Africa , storage facilities and LNG facilities could be flavour of the month , if we can stick bio-methane and seaweed farming on to that we'll be way ahead ..

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118541371#Comment_118541371

Half our gas comes from off Galway. So rolling out heat pumps or insulation or solar would mean less or even no need to import. There's a new field off Cork too that could be developed that could last long enough to wean us off fossil fuel. Hydrogen could be used to stretch the supply.

IIRC there were plans to store gas in salt domes in Dublin Bay , but also off Northern Ireland's east coast.

The rest of our gas supply comes from Norway / North Sea via Scotland

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118541347#Comment_118541347

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118541347#Comment_118541347

The maths on batteries is simple. Turlough Hill's 1.6 GWh has been providing the equivalent of current annual global output of lithium batteries volumes of storage since 1974.

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2020/06/16/hydrogen-storage-in-salt-caverns/

And pumped storage is dwarfed by potential Hydrogen storage in Europe of 84,800 TWh.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118541988#Comment_118541988

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118541494#Comment_118541494

The plan was going great until you got to, "foreshore license or something needed". Sweetman will be salivating.

Markcheese

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118542101#Comment_118542101

Hahahaha, true true , there mightn't even be a foreshore license needed if the plan uses the existing whitegate oil jetty ...

But that might be not be how foreshore licences work 😁

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118542032#Comment_118542032

Last Friday was a single data point, as was Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. What's a few windless weeks in a year when you can power the whole grid with wishful thinking? If I just concentrate a bit harder, all those big white whirly things will start turning any minute now....

cnocbui

This thread is a gas.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118541283#Comment_118541283

"For the upfront price of one nuclear power plant we could increase wind fivefold which means that 75% target would be reached on much calmer days."

For the price of a nuclear power plant we would solve the burning gas problem entirely and wouldn't need to spend so much on wind turbines in the first place - and we would get to net zero a decade earlier than the current hopium based schedule.

"The interconnectors are being rolled out anyway. "

But in another thread you were crowing about how terrible nuclear in France is after some cracks showed up after 20 years of near continuous zero CO2 output. Not to mention how unreliable you think nuclear is - ignoring those inconvenient decades of reliable output - but our saviour will be interconnectors to said known to be very reliable nuclear energy sources? We wouldn't want interconnectors to unreliable supplies, now would we?

"Solar is as cheap as chips and we'd only need a small fraction of the 12,000Km2 of bogs to meet annual needs if storage was cheap enough. Summer is easily sorted."

I thought bogs were supposed to be left untouched so they could sequester all that CO2 plant fertiliser in the atmosphere? Steal their sunlight and they won't be so happy to oblige. Some crazy people even want to rehabilitate some of them, not to mention thousands of square km of them are SACs, like all of mine, so you can't touch them. The poor bog plants see little enough light as it is and you want to cover them with panels.

Speaking of little light - solar panels produce 1/20th their rated output when there's cloud cover in summer and 1/30th or less in winter.

There is no cheap enough storage and there are no known technical paths to any. There's hydrogen hopium and some funky battery ideas and that's it.

And then there's the bit about hundreds of millions of year old salt deposits being great for storing hydrogen or gas, but nowhere to store nuclear waste safely for a million years or so. Stone the crows.

bk

I'm not sure why folks are getting worked up about Russia, it would have little impact on us.

We currently get roughly half our gas from the Corrib gas field, the other half mostly from Norway and the North Sea via the interconnector with Scotland. If we do need LNG imports, there are LNG terminals in Scotland that we can use.

Keep in mind, prior to Kinsale opening, we got all our gas via this interconnector, so we are in an even better place today.

The Russian situation mostly impacts supplies to Germany and countries close to there. It has a relatively small impact on us.

The fact that we don't have a LNG terminal is ironically kind of an advantage! The gas extracted in the Corrib can only be used in Ireland, as the interconnector is one way, Scotland to Ireland and we have no LNG terminals to export Corrib gas from. If we did, would need to compete more directly for gas on an international basis.

That is why I'm rather suspicious of those shouting to build LNG facilities. It as much about exporting gas from Ireland and making more money from it, as it is about importing gas.

If we need more gas, I'd be more in favour of exploring and developing more of our own gas fields, like the one near Kinsale, then building LNG terminals.

cnocbui

What happens to the price of gas if Russia goes nyet?

You won't be getting any gas from Noway or the UK, whatsoever, if that happens - duh!

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118546985#Comment_118546985

Then we increase production from Corrib. Part of the reason for the balance between the Corrib and the interconnector, is that the interconnector has to continue to be maintained and operated. If the UK is happy enough to skip those obligations, then we can turn up the tap on Corrib.

I mean if you don't care about the environment we could profit off gas and the Russian situation.

Allow the exploration and development of the gas fields near Kinsale and Corrib, build LNG terminals and carry out the project to reverse the flow of the interconnector and we could become a net exporter of gas.

€€€€€€ for Ireland, but not great for the environment.

BTW Also keep in mind that those interconnectors and Corrib supply Gas to Northern Ireland, so it isn't like the UK can just cut it off, not unless they are giving us NI back!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118546985#Comment_118546985

Sounds like a good excuse to move away from sources of energy controlled by other govt's

Markcheese

Pretty sure it's a totally different set up to compress natural to put on a ship than it is to expand it as you take it off a ship .

Plus no one would build a gas export terminal in Ireland - because there's not that much gas - corrib ain't gonna last for ever ..

bk

Yes it is possible, but yes it would be cheaper to just reverse the flow on the interconnector. That projects is priced at just €10million.

BTW There is far more gas off the west coast then just Corrib. Frankly we have so far tapped just the tip of the iceberg. The reason why we haven’t really explored it more, is because it is considered expensive to explore and extract gas from the North Atlantic.

However if we get into some fantastical situation where Europe is cut off from Russian gas, North Sea supplies start running dry, then even at higher extraction cost, it becomes an attractive option.

Having said that there has been a lot of talk recently about there being untapped gas fields near both Corrib and Kinsale that could be accessed quiet affordably using existing infrastructure.

I’d say watch this space.

One interesting thing to note from the article below, the global copper market will swing into a deficit of more than 6 million tons by 2030.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/China-Non-Fossil-Fuel-Power-Capacity-To-Hit-Record-This-Year.html

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118547036#Comment_118547036

Which is the position I have been arguing since day one, hence my constant criticism of championing of interconnectors. My goodness, we actually agree on something. Ryans opposition to an LNG terminal is an attack on energy self sufficiency and political independence.

An LNG terminal should not be tied to one supplier, either.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118547695#Comment_118547695

The ideas are sound, but the problem is time. The lag between crisies and those sorts of resolutions is one of years, when national grid problems need solutions on a time scale of hours or days.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118548033#Comment_118548033

I'd expect we'll see a lot more copper clad aluminium in future which should free up copper for use elsewhere.

If the grid used a DC backbone like interconnectors then you could push more power over existing cables and use lighter transformers. It may become an option in future.

Aluminium is used for overhead lines so copper not needed there. If you use an aluminium alloy containing zirconium you can run the wires hotter so you can push 50-100% more power through a route just by replacing the cables, though at the cost of higher transmission losses.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549453#Comment_118549453

Hours or days ? Grid constraints mean that inertia of spinning generators is used for the first few seconds, then several other levels of reserves kick in before you get to minutes. eg: cycle gas runs at 66% of full load to allow ramping up to 100% in seconds.

Hours is all you need to fire up extra gas (10 minutes in some cases) and we have plenty of gas. The 2030 target is 80% carbon free. That means that spread out over a year we could run on just gas for 10% of the time, another 10% of the time could be half the power from gas, 10% at quarter power from gas etc. Using more wind the rest of the time is all we'd need to do to meet the 2030 targets.

The infrastructure for surviving with no wind for weeks in winter is already in place.

Nuclear power plants that aren't restarted to full power in hours after being taken offline have to stay offline for days because of they have to wait for poisons to decay. They are the exact opposite of a solution for varying demand as they themselves require massive backup to be ready at all times and possibly for extended periods.

Germany, the UK and France have recently shown that even whole fleets of nuclear power plants can't be relied upon to produce the forecasted power.

cnocbui

"The infrastructure for surviving with no wind for weeks in winter is already in place."

It really isn't.

In the case of Germany, shutting them down does tend to make them reliably unreliable. In the case of France, that's after 20 years of use, it will be fixed, and off they go again. Measureed long term and not cherry picking, as you so like to do, their relibility is incomparably higher than wind.