Data centres back in the spotlight-using 18% of total power consumption of the country

I know what I said, and I stand by what I said.

What you think the real argument should be is by no coincidence whatsoever the things which are of greatest importance to you, neglecting the fact that in reality there are other stakeholders involved and other issues which have led to the current political and economic situation, precisely because Government had other priorities besides a moratorium on datacentres because of the amount of electricity they require.

More of them could be built, but without a connection to the grid, they would simply become like the ghost estates of the 2000’s, only that they’d be known as ghost datacentres, and datacentre operators aren’t going to invest anywhere that isn’t profitable for them. They too are a business, not a state owned body fighting against another state owned body, while politicians are fighting amongst themselves to produce more electricity to feed the national grid, at the cost of the environment, while each and every one of them is acutely aware that the population is increasing, and demands on energy consumption are increasing.

The conundrum arises from the fact that the real argument, if you want to put it in those terms - is how to meet the consumption needs of a growing population, while decreasing the demands on resources and reducing the effects of human activity on the environment. Government are fully aware they can either commit to one or the other, not both.

Sure why would a country want to export any goods and services? 🙄

There’s no argument against the idea that it’s just basic maths, the argument is in what you’ve characterised as a misdirection -

if you want to put it in those terms - is how to meet the consumption needs of a growing population

That Nonsensical misdirection has been dealt with.

Domestic use is one of the only areas that consumption is dropping.

Where in that sentence do I refer solely to domestic use of electricity? Residential use of electricity has remained relatively stable in the last decade, in spite of increasing energy bills due to numerous economic factors. What has increased exponentially is the demands placed on the electricity grid due to increased consumption, due to an increasing population.

It’s why I posed the hypothetical question to timmy earlier as to what they might consider would happen if every fossil fuelled vehicle were replaced with EVs. It should be obvious the increased demand that would place on the national energy grid, but there are potentially positive benefits for the environment in doing so, which is why Government are offering subsidies in the form of grants and lower taxation. I don’t expect that all residential electricity consumers would install chargers on their properties; I would imagine it would be more efficient to have businesses install public charging stations which would charge customers accordingly, as Norway have done -

https://www.visitnorway.com/plan-your-trip/getting-around/by-car/electric-cars/

Were you ever asked to pay your share of this fine?

Let's be frank, Irish ratepayers and residence are being completely taken for fools and ripped off to appease the multinationals here

If you do the math the refund being discussed here was a pittance (we had another thread for this I can't find it off hand) compared to the windfall that the business sector got.

When you talk about almost a fifth of the country's energy being sapped up by these datacenters, you can't defend them as 'paying their energy bills' when actually they aren't. Instagram and TikTok and Google etc. is being subsidised by home ratepayers, or at bare minimum, had done so for 12 **** years. You're not going to see most of that money back either apparently.

If you don't want it they're happy to keep it.

I'm assuming that bar one case of an error on ESB's part all these D C's are being billed for and paying for their power usage ? therefore the fact that they are using large amounts of power leading to Eirgrid having to issue an amber alert is not the fault of the DC's. When they initially applied for an ESB connection they would've had to state their MIC ( Maximum import capacity) which means that ESBN / eirgrid has that information available months or years in certain cases before any new DC is actually energized. So the fact that eirgrid are having to issue amber alerts due to there being low wind/ insufficient solar generation is not the fault of DC's, its the fact that the wind isn't blowing or sun isn't shining and Eirgrid / Government have not planned planned for such an event. Forgive me but it hardly takes weather radar or a crystal ball to know that the wind doesn't blow/ sun doesn't shine all day every day? Wind isn't new technology, that's been there ( albeit intermittently) since the stone age, same with sunshine thats around since the dawn of time ffs. Dc's applied for, paid for & received grid connections (no small change either I would imagine) Eirgrid received payment for same. Isn't it up to eirgrid / government to ensure that the power grid is reliable ? Someone dropped the ball here but I dont think its the DC's. The number of jobs they create/sustain etc is a different issue to the fact that there amber alerts being issued. Am I wrong ?

PBP and SD will probably want to ban people from having children cos there's a current shortage of houses.

That's how ridiculous this argument is.

All the scaremongering about power cuts last year and how many power cuts were there from grid capacity? Zero.

The media love a stupid story like this and some people just can't look more than 12 months ahead and demand stupid restrictions

I must have missed those posts, I will have a read back.

There are no national targets for industrial/electricity emissions (which is what data centre emissions are). There are no national fines.

Data centre emissions are restricted by the ‘cap and trade/ETS’ which sets a hard limit on the amount of emissions allowed. All emissions have to be paid for.

AI uses a lot of energy.

You can’t though, because a growing population requires infrastructure in order to support it, not just in terms of residential developments, but in terms of amenities like hospitals, schools, retail, factories, offices and so on.

Smart energy efficiency tech isn't just for domestic in fact it usually appears in commercial first.

The New Children's hospital will have some of the newest cutting edge tech in the country for energy efficiency.

Temple Street was built in 1879.

Crumlin 1956.

Building Regs for energy are not just for domestic.

I know that Boggles, but it’s somewhat besides the point being made that a growing population requires more infrastructure, which consumes more resources, such as electricity from the grid. I’m still positive about the long-term potential of the children’s hospital, but it’s just one hospital, unless the point you’re making in mentioning the other hospitals is the possibility of them being brought up to the same standard as the new children’s hospital, which would be great!

But, it still requires far more resources and electricity to operate than hospitals which are not state-of-the-art in terms of efficiency and so on. Getting those hospitals up to date would be great, but they will use more energy, or electricity, which is the point being made. The same is true of more schools which are required, more housing which is required, etc. I’m not disputing the idea that they could be more efficient to operate, I’m disputing the idea that it’s possible for a population to grow, while at the same time decreasing electricity consumption.

As it stands in terms of the new children’s hospital, they appear to have made an awful boob in terms of quantifying mechanical and electrical systems required -

Mistakes in quantifying mechanical and electrical systems are largely to blame for the escalating costs of the new National Children’s Hospital, the health committee will hear today.

It is expected that Tom Costello, chairman of the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board, will admit that the cost of such systems were initially underestimated by hundreds of millions of euro and that this mistake was only realised in the middle of last year.

In his opening statement today, Mr Costello will say that by mid-2018, it became clear that there was a “very significant gap developing between the estimated quantities at tender stage and the quantities that were now required”, causing an extra €320m to be added to the build cost.

He will say: “We are deeply disappointed and acknowledge the very significant cost increases and the challenges these pose. There are lessons to be learned in relation to the wisdom of pursuing cost reductions on competitive tenders and ensuring the sufficiency of tender information, in particular, mechanical and electrical services at tender stage.”

It is expected that the New Children’s Hospital Alliance group will also tell the committee that despite rising costs, the facility will be “second rate” as it will not have enough beds, operating theatres, or parking.

https://archive.ph/EpcX0

That’s why I said I’d be raising an eyebrow at the person employed by a datacentre who was looking for credit because they have the lights scheduled to turn off when they leave their home - there’s clearly a difference in terms of economies of scale between their domestic electricity consumption and commercial or industrial electricity consumption used to deliver services to the population!

Of course you can, we are legally bound to do it. Carbon neutrality doesn't work without decreased consumption or at least it is far harder to achieve.

The Germans are about to sign it into law, AFAIK the EU have collectively signed up to cut consumption by 2030 of around 12%.

Germany's government must make savings of 45 terawatt hours (TWh) per year. Federal states must collectively cut 5 TWh annually to reach Germany’s net zero target by 2045. The country used around 500 TWh of electricity overall in 2021.

The draft law also sets unbinding reduction targets of 39 per cent by 2040 and 45 per cent by 2045.