Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Energy infrastructure

Options
1126127129131132173

Comments

  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Mod: @Bass Reeves - Can you keep you posts away from straying into trolling territory.

    We know wind is intermittent and there are periods of little or no wind, but on average, up to 40% of generation comes from wind.

    It is like looking at a full car park and decrying peoples investment in personal ownership of cars.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    There are no ports suitable for offshore wind provision at present in the republic. Only Belfast is suitable




  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,817 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    I'm presuming it's capacity that caused them to study the nonexistent Bremore and not Dublin Port?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Probably

    I know Foynes having been pushing for investment for several years on this topic and they are well positioned to get it and be developed with this industry in mind. Will it happen quick enough though, that remains to be seen



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,140 ✭✭✭plodder


    Makes a lot of sense given the location (West coast) and they've put a lot of thought into it already.

    https://www.sfpc.ie/offshore-wind/



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,763 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    I presume Ireland, being a paragon of virtue and not one to engage in hypocrisy, will no longer be prepared to take gas from the UK once fracking is taking place? No fracked gas via an LNG terminal on the Shannon estuary and no fracked gas via the Moffat gas interconnector. How virtuous we will be. No doubt the fracking energy minister will soon come up with a cunning plan.



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,491 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Some of the gas that comes in from the UK has always been potentially fracked, given the UK has LNG terminals. So really nothing new.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I support your stance that Ireland should stop using gas, the sooner we get fossil fuels out of the energy mix the better 👍



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,763 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    So long as you pay for what it would take to enable that, and not me, I'd be fine with that. Imagine if there were an energy souce that had a capacity factor of 96.5% and so you would only have to use gas for 12 out of 365 days.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    You probably would not need gas with such a source. I imagine if it was that short a backup period this would be an outage/maintenance event and could be scheduled with the cooperation of other countries energy system.

    The intermittency of some do called renewable systems is the issue. You need 100% back up even if you over produce.

    The fairy tale that for a few days last winter that we produced all our electrical need from wind fails to factor in that gas turbines are not completely turned off or that Moneypoint was completely shut down. It also fails to recognize that these was days mid winter when wind produced virtually nothing during daylight hours

    The basic premise with wind is that it will be over producing somewhere and interconnection accross Europe will solve the intermittency nature of it. Solar is a limited source by daylight hours and in Ireland it's a very poor winter source en when it's a fine day. Maximum production is during the middle of the day which is a lower demand part of the day.

    Saying that we know wind is intermittent is not recognizing the energy infrastructure issues it's presents and the longterm costs to solve these issues. The only way wind is viable is to build a Hydro storage system. But we are unwilling to do that.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,654 ✭✭✭✭josip


    "You probably would not need gas with such a source. I imagine if it was that short a backup period this would be an outage/maintenance event and could be scheduled with the cooperation of other countries energy system."

    Are you proposing we should have 6GW of interconnectivity with the UK/France ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    No you probably would not need 6gw but a maintenance event is easier to manage than an intermittent event. For instance you would not need to run turbines on constant standby. Basically you could power them up to standby 12-14 days before the maintenance event and turn them off straight away afterwards.

    Your interconnectors would also help. For that matter two smaller systems which had limited maintenance outages would cut your demand in half. Four smaller systems would reduce the necessities for gas back up to a minimal level with interconnectors taking most of the load.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Shell have pulled out of the Irish offshore renewable market, stating that they will focus on markets with more accommodating legislative frameworks.

    One of the main issues seems to be a clause in the O-RESS that (I'm guessing) is designed to stop companies getting permission and not doing anything with it.

    Under the draft terms for the O-RESS auction, a successful energy company would be required to put up a “performance security’, which is essentially a bond to be kept in escrow until the project is delivered.


    This will require developers to put up a bond of €24 for every megawatt hour of energy the proposed project will deliver. As most offshore wind projects are very large in size, the bond required typically runs into the tens of millions.


    A major issue in the draft guidelines was believed to relate to a clause which stated that the Minister for Energy may take the bond if the project has not been granted planning consent by 2024.




  • Registered Users Posts: 480 ✭✭getoutadodge


    Equinor first..now Shell....



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,123 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    So who is actually supposed to be building moneypoint 1+2.

    If I remember correctly it was a partnership with ESB and equinor



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭Apogee


    The public consultation was launched about 2 weeks ago with a mid-October deadline, so it looks as though ESB are progressing it alone for now




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭Apogee


    On the one hand, requiring bidders to make progress in a timely manner makes sense. However, they may have little control over how long the planning approval process takes, especially if there are appeals to ABP or to the Courts.




  • Registered Users Posts: 10,123 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    I wonder could it be progressed as state owned generation company?

    Probably not allowed with competition laws etc.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 4,967 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Who do you speak to if you're not opposed to fracked gas?



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,350 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Equinor and Shell are two companies who have significant experience delivering projects at sea which are

    1. big
    2. come in on time
    3. come in on budget

    It’s a massive headache for the future of Irish offshore wind if these companies continue to pull out.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,115 ✭✭✭gjim


    I hope screaming alarm bells are going off in government offices. Off-shore wind in Ireland is way behind any of its European peers. Seeing companies fall away so early in the process means there's something seriously wrong with the process if countries like Scotland, Netherlands, etc. have been rolling out GWs of off-shore capacity over the last few years. Meanwhile there isn't a single significant project under construction yet in Ireland.

    In the medium/longer term, I think off-shore (when available) will come to dominate wind generation despite higher costs. The square law means an irresistible incentive to making bigger and bigger turbine blades - twice the blade length gives you 4 times the energy. Sites for huge blades are very limited on land. Even now, the biggest wind turbine in the world is used in an off-shore installation. That's before you consider the higher capacity factors and lower output volatility.

    There's a danger that early Irish success with deploying on-shore capacity may have caused complacency.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Shell got burnt with Corrib Gas.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,763 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    I have said this before, the Irish planning regime is a dung heap and needs to be wiped from the face of the Earth and a workable system copied from another country, since Ireland isn't capable of working this stuff out.

    The Shell and Equinor pull-outs are music to my ears. Love it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,763 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    @gjim

    The Russian sabotage of Nordstream 1 & 2 is where the panic should be at. Next to go will the pipelines from Norway to the UK and Europe.

    I'm so glad we have no LNG input capacity, at this historic juncture in time. Good one Eamon, history will remember you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,640 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    So what?? - energy costs or security don't appear to be much better for all this rollout of offshore wind in the likes of the UK, Germany etc. Developer led planning is failing badly in this space just as it is with housing in this country.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    An attack on the North sea gas lines would be an attack on NATO. The Nordstream was not functional, probably was never going to be and is as much Russian infrastructure as German.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,491 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    "I'm so glad we have no LNG input capacity, at this historic juncture in time. Good one Eamon, history will remember you."

    Hold on a second, if the Russians are willing to hit European owned gas pipelines, then logically nothing stopping them hitting LNG terminals too or sinking LNG ships in transit.

    If we want to have real energy security, then wind + hydrogen is what we need. The extremely distributed nature of wind turbines and solar panels would make them relatively difficult to attack. Hydrogen storage and plants would be a bit easier to hit, but much more difficult then an LNG terminal or LNG ships.

    BTW If they do attack the Norwegian pipelines, then it will be all out war. At least conventional war, Russia can kiss good bye to their Navy at the very least.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,763 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Can you prove who punctured the Nordstream pipes? This 'an attack on NATO' stuff is tiresome. Russia killed 298 mostly Dutch and Australian nationals without any comback. You can repair pipes, but those 298 are gone for good. An unattributable sabotage to some pipes on the sea floor is not going to have NATO launching an all-out against the country with the most nuclear warheads of any nation.

    Russia had nothing to lose with Nordstream, as it's obvious no gas was going to be flowing through it for years, if ever. Makes for nice shot across the bows, though.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,763 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    What country has successfully managed grid scale hydrogen? The cost of offshore wind plus storage is prohibitive - more than double that of the unmentionable alternative proven zero CO2 tech in the short term and 5 times the cost in the long term. It's the consumers that foot the bill for energy infrastructure.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Different US president. Obama shat in his pants in 2014. Biden the wanted the US intervention in 2014. Obama taught sanctions would work.

    While the sabotage may be unattributable if the US did not do it they know that it must have been Russia it is unlikely to be any other country.

    Biden will be very clear if it was not the US and will have no hesitation on how to act

    Slava Ukrainii



Advertisement