Eirgrid warns of power outages

Triangle

biko wrote: »

The Greens means well (I hope) but without reliable high electricity production we are ****ed.
Data centres, hospitals, banks, schools, my freezer - they all need uninterrupted power.

Eh the greens are a minority in government for the last 6 months.
I don't think the greens being decimated after 2010 left them much influence with the government over the previous years.

But the others ranting about the greens being the cause of this is a little ott. It might be their policy but they're not the cause. I think every party agreed with the Paris climate agreement.

But I suppose people just need someone to target.

JimmyVik

I thought anyone with an electric car was supposed to be able to plug them in to their house as a backup supply by now.
Thats what the greens were saying over a decade ago anyway.

gozunda

krissovo wrote: »

The hype and BS on this thread is scary and just proves how easily susceptible we are to social media crap. Blaming the greens and data centers is beyond a joke, next you will blaming us folk who drive EV’s for the drain of the grid.

Before you jump to conclusions you should qualify your statements, Eirgrid has a plan and has had for many years. Any shortfall of renewables will be met by nuclear power but not our own generated, it will be French nuclear power via the Celtic interconnector that is in planning right now.

So you decry generalities with more generalities ok lol. But yeah the greens well deserve criticism and no not everyone who does so - engages in group think or hates all EV owners...

That French nuclear power thing?

France has pledged to reduce its reliance on nuclear power by shutting down 12 nuclear reactors by 2035.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53233385

Apparently France will be importing energy from Germany produced using fossils fuels ..

Nermal

Your living standards depend on carbon emissions:



Policies like this:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/eu-reaches-landmark-agreement-to-cut-emissions-55-by-2030-1.4433902

will make you poorer. They may not cause power outages, but the warnings from Eirgrid are the canary in the decommissioned coal mine. They will cause us to spend more and more of our income on energy, and the more we spend on it the less we have to spend on everything else.

Thelonious Monk

Triangle wrote: »

Eh the greens are a minority in government for the last 6 months.
I don't think the greens being decimated after 2010 left them much influence with the government over the previous years.

But the others ranting about the greens being the cause of this is a little ott. It might be their policy but they're not the cause. I think every party agreed with the Paris climate agreement.

But I suppose people just need someone to target.

Yes I find it ridiculous that everyone blames the greens for carbon taxes etc when a FG government signed up for the Paris Agreement.
Also today, "EU leaders agree to cut emissions by 55% over the next decade after all-night summit", so we'll have to fall in line with that too, is that Eamon Ryan's fault too?
By the sounds of things I'll be the only person voting green in the next election so who will they blame when the greens have no seats in the dail?

Thelonious Monk

Nermal wrote: »

Your living standards depend on carbon emissions:

will make you poorer. They may not cause power outages, but the warnings from Eirgrid are the canary in the decommissioned coal mine. They will cause us to spend more and more of our income on energy, and the more we spend on it the less we have to spend on everything else.

We can't really continue as is though, so something needs to change, if we carry on at the rate we're going there'll be nothing left of the earth in a few years.
So much power and consumption of resources is wasted on crap that we don't need.

biko

Triangle wrote: »

But the others ranting about the greens being the cause of this is a little ott. It might be their policy but they're not the cause. I think every party agreed with the Paris climate agreement.

The Paris accord doesn't prevent nuclear power.
Afaik only Eamon Ryan is opposed to nuclear power for Ireland.

Idbatterim

suicide_circus wrote: »

Build a nuclear plant and stop relying on dirty fossil fuels and unreliable renewables

Will not happen here in our lifetime!

Danzy

suicide_circus wrote: »

Build a nuclear plant and stop relying on dirty fossil fuels and unreliable renewables

The economics of Nuclear power are horrendous.


It's an old industry now and cost is killing it.

Theoretical fusion reactors etc may change that in time but maybe not.

Danzy

biko wrote: »

The Paris accord doesn't prevent nuclear power.
Afaik only Eamon Ryan is opposed to nuclear power for Ireland.

No private investor will invest in Nuclear without the State guaranteeing to cover long term costs.

That makes it very expensive long-term.

Atlantic Dawn

I can see a ban on using Christmas lights coming, lol.

Triangle

biko wrote: »

The Paris accord doesn't prevent nuclear power.
Afaik only Eamon Ryan is opposed to nuclear power for Ireland.

I think you'll find the people living beside it would object to it too.

But my point is that it might be green policy, but they have not been making the decisions. So how can they be at fault?

Surely FF and FG who have been in power for the last 100 years are against Nuclear power or we'd have one by now

Danzy

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

You are missing the point, nuclear power is a bridge to

1. immediately stop using fossil fuels

2. buy time (2-3 decades) for renewables (wind, pv) and grids to improve which they are but at this rate it be decades


Compare that to the cost of continuing to burn fossil fuels while renewables have not caught up.

edit: While the rest are talking about going green the French are using above approach and growing their renewables now, and actually are the greenest country in europe.

That's fair enough. I've no problem with Nuclear bar the insane economic costs.

For the cost output any other alternative is significantly better including environmental perspective

beauf

I'd prefer to use Frances Nuclear power if it comes to that.
Take the advantages and outsource the disadvantages.

beauf

Nermal wrote: »

...

will make you poorer. They may not cause power outages, but the warnings from Eirgrid are the canary in the decommissioned coal mine. They will cause us to spend more and more of our income on energy, and the more we spend on it the less we have to spend on everything else.

I still don't get it.

They are the canary for what exactly? What is the warning here.

whisky_galore

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

1. the sea is one of the harshest environments imaginable, **** literally rusts away, maybe blocking off one or more bays and using tidal based difference is a better option but you can bet that would be opposed by locals and/or greens on environmental grounds

2. datacenters create jobs directly (technicians) and indirectly (Irish tech sector is one of the glowing stars of the economy)


I said it 15 years ago working in power generation that Ireland needs nuclear to tie us over for 20-40 years while renewable and grids are build (those also face opposition from NIMBYs)

aside: i have solar pv and solar hot water on my roof + battery so not opposed to renewables, I am a realist however


I think greenpeace (and the Greens) have a lot to answer for, their opposition and demonisation of nuclear in 80s and 90s has led to decades of coal/oil/gas/peat powerplants all around the world, with renewables only now approaching a descent pricepoint, and better grids still being hindered by lack of superconductors and NIMBYism

Yes Chernobyl and Fukushima are terrible accidents, but no one here would suggest, France or Finland are nuclear wastelands as a counterpart. France to this day remains one of the greenest economies in Europe CO2 emissions wise and now they are building up their renewables

Data centres create only a handful of jobs for all they suck out of the national grid. Big empty buildings for the most part.

correct horse battery staple

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Wind/solar is cheaper than nuclear now in 2020 of course theres no denying that like i said u have solar pv on my roof (doing **** all today)

BUT

these have crazy peaks and lows (subject of thread)

the solution to that is battery storage (and/or more pumped hydro) and/or maybe conversion to hydrogen which is approach Germany seems to be taking

BUT

these are very expensive and are only an emerging technology, see trials Tesla is doing in Australia i mentioned earlier, and of course car companies are gobling up all the lithium for car batteries, which is not exactly an environmentally green element to mine, along with a ton of rare earth elements that needed in wind and solar.

There is a reason China is a leader in wind and solar, they tolerate massive environmental damage in their own country in processing the rare earth elements required for these.


So it all goes back to my point

step1. nuclear to buy 20-40 years and immediately shutdown coal/oil/turf plant

step2. build more wind + pv + battery storage in that time, with gas dealing with peaking needs

step3. decommission nuclear in 2050-2060 and by then the work done in step2 can hopefully handle the loads. Who knows we might also have fusion cracked by then and viable economically.

I'd prefer an interconnector and purchase Nuclear or Hydro from France or Norway. In a number of years then the interconnector will be used to sell Wind electricity to Europe when we have it spare to sell.

ED E

whisky_galore wrote: »

Data centres create only a handful of jobs for all they suck out of the national grid. Big empty buildings for the most part.

Data centers save us from power outages, before you go talking out your arse.

In addition to customers individually participating in the schemes operated by EirGrid, medium to large electricity users can participate in a Demand Side Unit (DSU) or Aggregated Generating Unit (AGU). A Demand Side Unit consists of one or more demand sites that can reduce their demand when instructed by EirGrid or SONI. The Demand Side Unit has one hour to reduce its demand and must be capable of maintaining the demand reduction for at least two hours.

Any large facility that has generators can be flipped off grid if we're red lining and deliver back a mountain of capacity to the grid.

This whole story is nonsense postering, Eirgrid/ESBN were never putting themselves in an at risk position. Theyve always gotten whatever they've wanted on the basis that we always keep the lights on.

Nermal

beauf wrote: »

What is the warning here.

That decarbonisation is impossible without vast, vast expenditure.

The result of that expenditure being that we're all significantly poorer - we're generating and consuming the same amount power but paying a lot more for it.

Eirgrid needing more resources to keep the lights on in the face of carbon constraints is one step on this road.

whisky_galore

whisky_galore wrote: »

Data centres create only a handful of jobs for all they suck out of the national grid. Big empty buildings for the most part.

I am so sick of hearing that argument.

The IT department of the company I work for is about 700 people. They don't all actually work in the data centre, but if the DC didn't exist neither would their jobs. I'm sat at home in Galway but working on a system thats whirring away in the data centre.

pummice

US2 wrote: »

We live on an island in the roughest sea in the world, why don't we generate power from waves? Very realiable. The big massive data centers here are a serious drain on our power supply for next to no economical gain.

We tried that. Remember WAVEBOB ?

Calahonda52

Deleted User wrote: »

I am so sick of hearing that argument.

The IT department of the company I work for is about 700 people. They don't all actually work in the data centre, but if the DC didn't exist neither would their jobs. I'm sat at home in Galway but working on a system thats whirring away in the data centre.

Where the DC and the jobs are, other than the DC security and other guys, are not related so to claim that say 600 jobs in Ireland exist because of a DC is playing fast and loose with fake news

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I am so sick of hearing that argument.

The IT department of the company I work for is about 700 people. They don't all actually work in the data centre, but if the DC didn't exist neither would their jobs. I'm sat at home in Galway but working on a system thats whirring away in the data centre.

I think you overstate this. I'm not going to be forced to move my job to Singapore or East Coast\West Coast US or Holland just because some of our datacentres are there. If there was such a strong linkage between Datacentre location and job creation then people would be fearful for their jobs.

ted1

US2 wrote: »

We live on an island in the roughest sea in the world, why don't we generate power from waves? Very realiable. The big massive data centers here are a serious drain on our power supply for next to no economical gain.

Rough seas destroy man made things.
There’s no commercial wave concertos available

ted1

Del2005 wrote: »

I wonder how many diesel and petrol generators are going to be bought by people to protect against losing power? Another not fully thought out "green" policy that will result in more pollution.

There grants for PV and batteries, seems to fully thought out to me.

They also don’t plan on losing power. One of the most stable grids around

ted1

biko wrote: »

The Greens means well (I hope) but without reliable high electricity production we are ****ed.
Data centres, hospitals, banks, schools, my freezer - they all need uninterrupted power.

They have it.

ted1

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Thats a sure way to destroy your car battery

As I mentioned earlier in thread i have solar pv and water on roof and a battery to store excess

The PV panels i expect to last few decades (85% capacity guarantee after 25 years) however the battery i expect to go and replace in 5-10 years, they claim 10,000 recharge cycles

Last few months there has barely been any sun, so been charging the battery on cheaper night rate and then discharging during the day, my last bill has barely any usage during the day

but i expect this to destroy the battery

The Greens also promised we get paid for backfeeding into grid when battery is full, still get paid nothing

It’s coming in next year. Personally I think net metering is a better option than paying someone who incorrectly sized a domestic OV array

ted1

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

You are missing the point, nuclear power is a bridge to

1. immediately stop using fossil fuels

2. buy time (2-3 decades) for renewables (wind, pv) and grids to improve which they are but at this rate it be decades


Compare that to the cost of continuing to burn fossil fuels while renewables have not caught up.

edit: While the rest are talking about going green the French are using above approach and growing their renewables now, and actually are the greenest country in europe.

If we decided to build a nuclear plant it’d be 20+ years before it goes live. So your points 1 and 2 are flawed

boombang

I'm all on for nuclear, but it has to be French not domestic.

Just think how much more expensive Ireland would make an already capital expensive technology. Remember the children's hospital. Now think all the newly created Qangos and expert bodies we'd appoint. It would be a guaranteed cost nightmare.

ted1

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

That would be a rational choice but interconnectors are usually in range of 100 MW, peak usage is 70x that

they also lose power over distance like the grid itself does (10-20%)

I posted earlier a link to eirgrids live and historic graphs which the guys usually have in the control room down near where i worked.
edit: https://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/s[/no B quote]

Transmission losses are 2% nowhere near the 10-20%

Interconnecters are not usually 100MW. They are multiples of that