Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

"Green" policies are destroying this country

1109911001102110411051132

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,158 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Alternatives such as burning coal? How can taking a source out of the mix lead to lower costs? Does not make sense in the long term and only for non fossil fuel alternatives we would be at the mercy of oil companies and suppliers.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,158 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Burning Coal! What would that do to the environment and if you don't care what about the penalties we have to pay to the EU on emissions?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,631 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    The poster understands that what people may have said in an opinion poll before an election in relation climate change and the environment is not a vote to elect a government. An exit poll, on the other hand, is how they actually voted.

    Something you appear incapable of understanding.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,088 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    You made the error, as usual instead of admitting it you attack the poster

    An exit poll had zero relevance to what I posted. Dont attack others for your own ignorance



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,631 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    I didn`t say I favour bubning coal. I said it was bizarre that under the marginal pricing policy that if we burned coal instead of gas we would have cheaper electricity charges.

    When it comes to emissions, if the E.U. and greens were really concerned about emissions they would classify burning wood under it`s true emissions rate rather than engaging in dodgy bookkeeping to hide the real emissions levels where the E.U. gets 60% of its energy from burning biomass.

    We could avoid any potential fines on emissions and be regarded by the E.U. as carbon neutral by importing and burning millions of tons of wood annually. Would you be happy with that ?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,631 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    No error whatsoever.

    You appeared to believe that 9% on climate change in an opinion poll was relevant in some unexplained way to the result of the election.

    It wasn`t. The only percentage of relevance was the 4% whose FPV it influenced.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,088 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    Attack the poster because of your own mistake

    I said nothing about percentages. I was responding to someone who claimed the climate wasn't in the top 10 issues for voters, it was. That was it.

    You made an error and since then we have this spew of nonsense.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,631 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Stop with the pointless nonsense. You pointed it out as being 5th at 9%.

    When it came to how people actually voted the percentage was less than half that 9%.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,088 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    Lets just explain this

    This was posted by J62

    Because they are the party moaning the loudest about climate change while for everyone else it’s a minor issue (which reflects the population itself for whom climate is probably not in top 10 issues)

    I responded

    Got this from statistica

    Climate is 5th

    image.png

    You then posted something about an exit poll which had nothing to do with the discussion.

    Now you can post all the condescending posts you want but the issue is directly with yourself and it's embarrassing carry on for anyone on the internet



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,631 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Will you ever cop yourself on and stop wasting my time and cluttering up the place with your pointless nonsense.

    You posted that climate change and the environment was 5th. at 9% as if it had some relevance to the result of the election. It didn`t because it was an opinion poll. The poll that is relevant to the election is the 4% of those that the exit poll showed voted in the actual election.

    How you are incapable of understanding that I have no idea, nor do I care. So go away and harass somebody else as I have better for doing than wasting any more of my time on your waffling and snide little remarks to other posters in reference to me. A practice that has incurred censure and bans here in the past as far as I recall.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,338 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    This one always tickles my funny bone. Instead of being at the mercy of fossil fuel companies, we'll be at the mercy of renewable companies.

    This line is often thrown out with the childish belief that when we go to 100% renewable, the prices will be next to nothing. When in reality we'll be bent over to be shafted by the renewable crowd who would be the only show in town.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭j62


    Uhm hate to break it to you but prices have gone only in one direction with wind and solar

    While countries that embraced nuclear and fracking are booming with cheap energy



  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 7,929 Mod ✭✭✭✭Irish Aris


    Mod note:

    @charlie14 @Clo-Clo

    It looks like you don't agree on that particular point, so can you please agree to disagree and move on?

    And, as a general rule, keep it civil.

    Thank you.

    Upcoming gigs and events: Dry Cleaning, The Shawshank Redemption, Sprints, These Charming Men, Sasha Velour, Disorder Festival, David Byrne, The Cure, Garbage, Bob The Drag Queen, Sigur Ros, Olafur Arnalds, Cabaret Voltaire, Angine de Poitrine, Cardinals



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,088 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,840 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    What if, and this is just a hypothetical, said €20 billion fine went to bailout the German auto industry I mean support green jobs? Germany relies heavily on automotives, and Europe relies heavily on Germany as its top economy. Now, due to climate initiatives, Volkswagen is closing plants for the first time in its 87-year history. This can easily cause a ripple effect throughout the entire European economy.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭j62


    20bn can build plenty of car factories right there

    I don’t see why we need to bailout Germany (whom made terrible political choices), they sure as hell made it clear they didn’t want help anyone else during the GFC



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,158 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Fracking! Nuclear! Not a chance in this country. Might as well ask for what we could develop like wind and there's plenty of it around tonight.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,158 ✭✭✭saabsaab




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭j62


    no it wouldn’t just look at US who embraced both technologies



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭j62


    IMG_5548.jpeg

    wind absolutely roaring outside

    Checks what our 7000MW of wind doing… 1500MW

    1500MW of solar? Zero 🙃



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,631 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    That is most likely Plan B if Plan A fails.

    Shafting E.U. farming to keep the German car industry in business.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭j62


    if you worried about energy security then relying on technology that needs constant supplies of imported gas (since we can’t extract the 20-30 years of gas in Ireland) is rather srupid



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,158 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Not so stupid if we develop hydrogen tech. or bio methane. We can also import or export through interconnectors.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭j62


    Sure, right after we crack fusion and pigs fly past the completed children’s hospital and over the Galway bypass



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,428 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Thank god we can import through interconnectors. On one of the windiest nights of the year, we had nearly full imports from EWIC and Moyle. No doubt the wind farms will be whinging about that (despite the market behaving per the design - they just won't bid appropriately with negative prices).

    Screenshot_20241207-064705.png

    However, wind underperformed substantially. Again, the wind farms will probably suggest that it was constrained or curtailed when in reality a lot of it will have disappeared due to High Wind Speed Shutdown where the turbines simply give up producing in order to protect themselves. Nothing wrong with that in theory until a gigawatt or two simply vanishes when you require it.

    Screenshot_20241207-064736.png

    So yeah, expensive unproven hydrogen tech on top of expensive unproven wind tech. Where exactly is all this hydrogen tech source energy going to come from? The interconnectors? Who is going to pay for it? The consumers who are already paying the 2nd most expensive electricity rates in Europe?

    Save boards.ie by subscribing: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭ps200306


    Ireland is entirely dependent on fossil fuels. A power system that is going to be completely absent for extended periods — and you don't know which periods — is always going to be dependent on fossil fuels. We can quibble about the word "entirely". Our economy and society would entirely collapse without power when we need it. I would say that makes us entirely dependent on reliables which are mostly fossil fuels at the moment.

    As for price hikes due to supply disruptions, sure, that's a feature of all supply chains. The fact of the matter is that European natural gas prices returned to normal pretty quickly after the initial shock of the Ukraine war. They had already been high six months before the outbreak of war due to Russia throttling supply through the Yamal-Europe pipeline, plus increased global demand with the economy rebounding from the pandemic. The normalisation of prices despite the loss of Russian supply is quite reassuring. It couldn't have happened just a few years ago, and is the product of an increasingly mature global LNG supply chain. It has made us more resilient to the machinations of a bad actor like Russia.

    Compare that with the cost of new wind energy. Like most capital intensive businesses it is severely impacted by the inflation of the past few years and hasn't returned to "normal". Prices increased by 40% last year (source: Vattenfall). It also is subject to the whims of global supply chains. Just this week, China is firing warning shots across the bows of the tariff-happy US by restricting exports of rare earth metals. The EU is in dispute with China about EV and battery dumping which could lead to more tit-for-tat trade controls. The future for European renewables businesses is probably more uncertain than the fossil fuel supply.

    With natural gas prices near historic norms, you're going to have to find a different reason why Ireland's electricity prices have been going up inexorably with increasing renewables penetration. It's not a big mystery. The experience has been the same in many other places.

    First point to make is that we don't use oil to generate electricity by and large. Some plants can use natural gas or distillate fuel. Oil accounts for about 5% of generation (and that's quite high compared to global averages).

    However when it comes to fossil fuel prices, whether oil or gas, the point about being at the mercy of suppliers is a complete red herring. Big Oil doesn't set the price of oil or gas. That is done by global markets who watch supply/demand imbalances like a hawk and trade on the outcomes.

    It's funny that people are so prone to believing in rapacious price setters (which don't exist) when it comes to fossil fuels, but don't see the predatory investors behind Big Wind. I say "predatory" because they prey on governments' willingness to agree strike prices for delivered power that are guaranteed for years ahead whether the power is needed or not.

    I blame the government more than the investors — the latter are just doing what capitalists do, while the former are engaging in market distortion. Fortunately those sorts of incentives are gradually being rolled back, but it has also exposed the fragility of the renewables industry since much of turns out not to be viable without ongoing public largesse.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 852 ✭✭✭gossamerfabric


    wind = stone soup.

    Windfarm, Solar and Grid Battery operators are going to cheer on the prohibition of ICE powered cars and Central heating using gas or oil. They need a scarcity of electricity to engage in predatory pricing practices.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,158 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Not adding renewables into the mix will result in lower prices? That doesn't make sense at least long term.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,631 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    We have been hearing this for years now and we still have the 2nd highest charges in Europe. We were being told that the cost of offshore was going to decrease dramatically. The only thing dramatic about the cost of offshore is the increase.

    The U.K. recent offshore auction in September resulted in CFD contracts being awarded at 40% higher than two years ago. Offshore wind in the U.K. for fixed turbines is now €100/MWh, and for floating €240/MW/h.

    Even if, in the unlikely event, we got a similar strike price, due to this present plan of 50% generation going to hydrogen and 50% to domestic supply the consummer would be on the hook for €200 for fixed and €480 for floating. And that is before all the costs of the hydrogen add-ons on top, plus paying for all wind generation even if we neither need or want it.

    I don`t see where we will get lower prices from that.

    Post edited by charlie14 on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭j62


    We’ve added more renewables somewhere about 8000MW in wind and solar as of this year

    Where our peak is 6500-7000MW

    And our prices went up and up and up and we continue to burn oil and coal as these are so unreliable and random

    And no you can’t blame the war anymore as gas prices are below where they were when war started

    Renewables lowering prices and CO2 emissions is a myth as can be seen from current data, most of the reduction have come from moving from oil and coal to gas (gas that we have in this country but can’t extract)

    Ah you say but hell with data whataboutery hydrogen



Advertisement
Advertisement