Would you support a windfarm in your area?

redlough

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120333054#Comment_120333054

The question, which I asked before

The obvious CO2 to create windfarms from concrete etc, is that less over the 20+ year term of the wind turbines?

Also building a power station uses a lot of concrete as well.

SeanW

No

No, the sources I've reviewed look at it on a full lifecycle and Kilo/Mega/Tera-Watt Hour basis.

Yes, building other types of power plants does involve using concrete, steel, etc. but you get a lot more energy back for what you put in.

Capt'n Midnight

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120333054#Comment_120333054

Nuclear power plants usually take 6 months from grid connection to commercial operation. It's not turnkey.

That's 2/3rds of the time it takes wind turbines to offset their whole lifetime carbon footprint. Once there's progress on steel and cement decarbonising the that time will drop further.

There's no comparison, wind delivers carbon savings waaaaay sooner than nuclear.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120337281#Comment_120337281

Even if true, the energy used while waiting for a nuclear power station has to be considered. That power station that was supposed to be running in 2009 is still not fully operational. Egro it will take 14 years to offset the fossil fuel usage caused by delays alone. We're looking at 2037 before it even begins to offset it's construction and fuelling footprint. And there's the the decommissioning at end of life too. And the waste repository that hasn't opened yet , mining uses lots of energy.

New nuclear power means more carbon for many years and a whole variety of ways plants could be shut down before they're carbon neutral.

Trick question : When will the two newest reactors at the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Generating Station in South Carolina become carbon neutral ?

SeanW

No

If any of the above had anything to do with reality, then please explain to me why France is currently producing almost an order of magnitude less CO2 per kwh of energy that they use vs. Germany, which has been pursuing an Energiewende (renewables) policy for decades? Renewables don't work. They waste money, they waste natural resources, they spoil the landscape, threaten large scale species extinction, and they produce only small amounts of unreliable power at enormous financial cost.

And the financial data make it clear: in the U.S. states such as California have among the highest electricity costs (and the least reliable supply), while here in Europe countries like Germany, Denmark and Ireland have (at least pre-2022) the highest energy costs of European states.

Grayson

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120333054#Comment_120333054

The point of oil rigs is that they pump out carbons afterwards. There's not a single power source that doesn't involve using raw materials to build. It's not like we can magic up energy, unless you're building a perpetual energy machine. And even them, you'd have to build the actual machine.

You posted a photo of a bird dying. How many birds died when the exxon valdez went down? Or deep water horizon? How many species are going extinct because of climate change? In ireland more than a quarter of all species are at risk.

https://www.irishtimes.com/environment/2022/09/24/more-than-a-quarter-of-species-in-ireland-at-risk-of-extinction/

So please don't give me faux outrage. I don't want to see birds die at all but we need a cleaner energy source. For Ireland that means wind, wave and some limited solar. I'd like to see Ireland scoping out the use of nuclear power but that's not going to happen.

redlough

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120337281#Comment_120337281

No you don't.

You create a large concrete building creating lots of CO2 and then it starts to create more pollution as soon as it is up and running.

Wind turbines do require CO2 to build, nobody said they don't, but then they have a lifespan of 20 + years and lots of those components including the concreate can be reused generating electricity with no additional CO2

So I have no idea what you reviewed. But it was incorrect

Jim2007

Nach dem Abschalten des Kernkraftwerks Mühleberg werden im Umkreis von 50 Kilometern keine Jodtabletten mehr im Voraus verteilt. Dies betrifft zahlreiche Gemeinden in den Regionen Bern, Solothurn, Freiburg, Neuenburg und Waadt. Künftig lagert der Kanton die Tabletten ein.

I received the above message [edited to remove personal details] this morning telling me where the iodine tablets are being stored. The real question is would you support a neural power plant rather than a wind farm in your area?

SeanW

No

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120338956#Comment_120338956

Two things:

1. We know about the Exxon Valdez and Deepwater Horizon. They made the news, and mainstream environmental movements shriek about them. All. the. time. Yet when it comes to the extreme ecological damage caused by wind turbines, there is nothing. It's almost like there is an omertà. And before we hear about domestic cats again, cats don't kill large birds like eagles. Windmills do.
2. The incidents with the oil industry were the result of accidents and failures. Nobody supports crashing loaded oil tankers or blowing up active oil rigs. But they do support wind turbines where the danger is inherent in even correct operation. It's a simple consequence of industrialising the landscape and exposing wildlife to fast moving parts.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120339586#Comment_120339586

I was referring more to materials usage than secondary CO2 output. You have to use stupid amounts of steel and concrete to make a given mega-watt capacity of wind mills. On a strictly secondary CO2 output basis wind and nuclear are comparable, but with the former you must consider that it is unreliable and needs much more backup.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120340332#Comment_120340332

I assume you mean nuclear power. Yes, if the plans made sense I would actively support it. 100%.

Birdnuts

No

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120340332#Comment_120340332

Your windfarm will need back up from a conventional power source - where that plant is located is irrelevant.

Tom Mann Centuria

Yes

More of a wind small holding than a farm about mile or so away from me, but it isn't an issue. I wouldn't object to one closer, but would love to see them try different tech that isn't as problematic to the bird and bat population.

redlough

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120342057#Comment_120342057

So you didn't check the full lifecycle. You picked parts of it to try make a point and failed badly

SeanW

No

Congratulations - you successfully rebutted a claim I never made. :)

Now, can you explain why you want drive all the eagles and bats to extinction?

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120346429#Comment_120346429

The second sentence is hilarious given what it follows in the first sentence

SeanW

No

Well, the eco-fruitcakes seem to be eager to wallpaper the planet with eagle-chomping and bat-killing monstrosities. I don't know why - it's not like the damn things are actually useful.

polysteamtoken

Yes

How about we start by teaching people not to breed so much? Having so many people around is the real problem here. Why just in my life time the population has almost doubled. We have been on earth for how many thousands of years and only recently this has happened. Apparently we are at our most intelligent. I think not. Amazes me when people somehow think brining a child into the world somehow completes them. It's pretty pathetic. We are the problem nothing else.

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120347292#Comment_120347292

I hear far greater issues are caused by cats which have a devasting impact on the ecosystem

SeanW

No

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120347465#Comment_120347465

Cats tend to kill smaller birds that have fast breeding cycles and are not endangered. Windmills specifically kill larger birds that have much more serious conservation issues (e.g. eagles). They also rival White Nose Syndrome as an existential threat to bat populations.

Why are mainstream environmentalists OK with this?

Montage of Feck

There are fringe benefits to having a wind farm in your locality such as having gravel roads for walking or mountain biking.

StudentDad

Yes

If I had my way every house in Ireland would have a windmill and the excess sold to the grid.

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120347482#Comment_120347482

Not sure what you are trying to achieve by linking to a search query.

Perhaps you have something that shows this issue locally, say Ireland or GB, as the ecosystems are nearly identical. I'd love to review

Markcheese

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120347527#Comment_120347527

Dublin bay strikes me as one of the best places for them ,

close to where the electricity is used ,

They're not right onshore anyway ,

Thelonious Monk

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120348358#Comment_120348358

There are loads planned off the coast of South Dublin, not quite in the bay though

Markcheese

Yes

I'm all up for wind turbines not being positioned for ecological reasons - so an active bog - or if bogland needs to be further drained releasing carbon -

Or if for eg it's in a hen harrier area or nesting area for sea birds ,

I can kinda see if it's really close to housing -

But if you're gonna rule out scenic areas , historic areas ,(rightly) protected areas , areas where anyone can see them , areas where anyone lives or visits - then what ..

There is work being done on preventing bird strikes , some of them make the turbine and mast more visable , some can shut down when large birds approach ,some don't operate at certain times of the year ..

SeanW

No

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120348673#Comment_120348673

The alternative is to do what the French did and actually de-carbonise our electricity supply.

FranceCO212March23.png

The benefits are clear:

• Actual, meaningful CO2 reductions.
• No scenic landscapes ruined.
• No threat to biodiversity.
• Electricity provided regardless of what the weather happens to be like at any given moment.
• Avoiding the insane energy costs of places like California, Germany, Denmark etc.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120347976#Comment_120347976

Because a simple web search is all you need to show that there is grave cause for concern. As to studies specific to Ireland and the UK, I'm not aware of any, but both islands have eagles and bats so I assume the danger is here too.

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120351715#Comment_120351715

If you happen to come across any local studies please let me know

Grayson

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120342057#Comment_120342057

So you completely ignored the fact that a quarter of Irish species are at risk of extinction due climate change caused by fossil fuels. Instead you focused on the exxon valdez. You say this to support your view that deaths from the carbon industry are preventable and accidents. They're not. They're part of the whole process. The end point of continuing to use carbon is mass extinctions. We need to stop using fossil fuels. And we need to do it as soon as possible. Like right this second if possible. That means wind and wave power.

Let's make this simple. Carbon powered energy or renewables like wind? Which is it? Because unfortunately nuclear isn't an option in Ireland.

Cyrus

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120351715#Comment_120351715

so you advocate nuclear over renewable because its safer for birds?

and gloss over the multi billion euro construction cost, time to build, the fact that no matter where its proposed to be there would be massive oppostion and nuclear installations are notoriously unreliable.

Markcheese

Yes

I have no problem not building in an area because of bird or bat risk , or because of bogland whatever ,

But it'd need to be on risk ,

Most Irish bats fly relatively low ( because they're chasing insects and are less likely to be up high in windy conditions because again they're chasing flying insects , doesn't mean that bats in Ireland don't get killed by wind turbines ( or more likely the turbulence created by turbines ,) but it's less likely ,

Most large birds, as long as they can see the moving blades , and again dependant on positioning should be fine , species like hen harriers would prob be an exception ,

Markcheese

Yes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120351715#Comment_120351715

We can't replicate french nuclear policy from the 70s / 80s , hell the french can't replicate it either,

But , we could go nuclear backed up with gas , (french have hydro,we don't )

Or wind backed up with gas ,

Both are pricey , nuclear looks considerably dearer,when intrest rates are included ,

Both would need considerable grid work ,

Nuclear would probably take decades longer to introduce, site selection would be political dynamite , the court cases would be staggering , ( think of the incinerator n cork harbour ,the ringsend one , or the canceled apple data centre ) , and THEN 15 or so years of construction. So probably longer than the design life of a wind farm

Wind isn't quick or certain in Ireland either ,it's probably 8 to 10 years from proposal to supplying electricity ..

We don't have any nuclear industry at all .. so that'd be starting from scratch - ( but with how long the project would take may not be an issue. . )

John_Rambo

Yes

It's hilarious when people who obviously don't give a crap about nature, biodiversity or habitats suddenly become eco warriors when it comes to wind turbines.