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

Shannon water for Dublin

1356718

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,791 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    I saw the Colorado river once. When I was standing in the baking heat of the Nevada desert, nothing but bare rocks as far as the eye can see, and the enormity and majesty of the Hoover Dam below me, I turned to the wife and said, shure twould remind you of Birdhill.

    If climate change gets to the point where the Shannon no longer reaches the sea, we have much bigger problems than this pipeline.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭db


    How do you see this preventing flooding problems in the future?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,034 ✭✭✭✭Red Silurian


    This might sound like a silly question but the current plans are for the pipeline to run to Dublin from Birdhill with a few booster pumps along the way. Would it not make more sense for the pipeline to come further north nearer to its starting point, starting this at Athlone or Carrick-on-Shannon would surely reduce the overall price of the project.

    I understand this is Irish Water we are talking about who historically have no sense of the value of money. but is that the only reason?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,297 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    Further upstream, the river isn’t big enough to draw off the required volume of water without affecting surrounding users.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,330 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    It won't help to alleviate flooding.

    The project has never been promoted as an answer to flooding.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,034 ✭✭✭✭Red Silurian


    That makes very little sense, if they're only diverting 2% if the flow then the surrounding users are unlikely to be affected at all. Unless are they saying that 2% will actually make a big difference to those who rely on the river downstream?

    I sense there's some strange politics at play here



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,330 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    The original project was planning to abstract at the Inner Lakes on Lough Ree just North of Athlone.

    Following strong local objection this plan was abandoned.

    Irish Water to resubmit Lough Ree water extraction plan https://share.google/oghJksR6OgE0uLUaK



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,791 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    I think the point is that 300 million litres might be 2% of the flow at Parteen and will not affect surrounding areas, but 300 million litres might be 10% of the flow at Athlone and might be 20% at Carrick.

    I'm pulling these numbers out of the air but the further upriver you go, the less water there is.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,297 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    Rivers get bigger as they flow downhill toward the sea.

    The water demand is an absolute number of litres - it’s not related to the size of the river.

    At Birdhill, this demand happens to be about 2% of the volume of the river. If you move upstream, where the river volume is smaller, then that absolute volume is a higher percentage of the total.

    Maths and geography aren’t political.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,034 ✭✭✭✭Red Silurian


    Interesting, I would have thought there was more water the further up the river you go, due to human consumption on the way down etc



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,297 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    Most human consumption is put back in again further downstream (hopefully after being cleaned). The tiny amount of extraction that leaves and never comes back is far outweighed by the amount gained by inflows from tributary rivers and general runoff from the surrounding land.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,034 ✭✭✭✭Red Silurian


    Yeah I can see how that might make sense in fairness



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,150 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    No it won't. It may affect levels and ecology during dry spells though.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,712 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    That is not true.

    The leaks occur in cast iron pipes. The join between these pipes leak, and will always leak. They just insert a new plastic pipe inside the cast iron pipe with a new connection to each house.

    Our road was part of a project to fix leaks. The connection to each house was dug out, and a new blue plastic pipe was fed through the cast iron pipe from one end to the other, and a new connection made to this pipe at each house. This was then connected to the feed to the house (with a water meter put in place). At the end of the exercise, with all houses connected, they had reduced the leaks to ZERO. With the new meters they could monitor the water use by each house in real time.

    This was all done prior to the IW fiasco. IW then came and replaced all our working meters.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,712 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    As I understand it, the routing has the pipe going downhill most of the way, so no intervening pumps are needed.

    For most of the states existence up until recent times, the most common election promise in the western parts was the draining of the Shannon. Now it is planned it is opposed by those same areas. Politics - how are ye?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,250 ✭✭✭MacDanger


    Open to correction here but when you say "the most common election promise in the western parts was the draining of the Shannon", it was in the context of preventing flooding, right? I'm pretty sure this project will do nothing to prevent flooding



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,330 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Even the most ardent supporters of the proposal have never claimed that it will help to alleviate flooding.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,804 ✭✭✭JVince


    The best water systems in the world have 16-20% leakage.

    Leakage is not always "leaks", some is literally people illegally tapping into a supply (eg farm or other heavy users)

    The current number is 36% - down from 49% (32% in Dublin). Even with the best will in the world, it will not go under 30% unless every pipe is replaced.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,712 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    It is the irony that is the point.

    The grandfather in the thirties and forties wanted the Shannon drained, now the current lads want to keep the water - not to prevent floods but to do no more than just prevent Dublin getting it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,297 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    Even the thread title reflects this. The scheme is to feed water supplies in all of Leinster, but “Shannon water for Dublin” …



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,250 ✭✭✭MacDanger


    I'm not from anywhere close to the Shannon, nor do I live in the Dublin region so I don't really have a vested interest in this but to characterise the opposition as "no more than just prevent Dublin getting it" doesn't add a whole pile to the discussion and comes across as fairly patronising.

    I suspect at least some of the opposition to the project is in the reality that the flowrates being discussed currently are almost guaranteed to increase in the future and when the hot summer's day/week comes that there's a choice to be made between sending water to the reservoir for drinking purposes and maintaining a miniumumly sustainable river level downstream, there's only ever going to be one winner



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,712 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    I have actually heard a protester use that exact phrase '- not a drop for Dublin' or words to that effect.

    The media usually quote the maximum flow rate (the most exaggerated number) in reports. Of course, the flow rate sounds enormous, so that will do.

    It is quoted otherwise as 2% of the flow rate at Parteen, so nothing really. I would imagine it will keep the reservoirs full in Dublin and elsewhere. In the meantime, the leakage in Dublin is being tackled, but the actual usage is increasing. So, more supply is needed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,324 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    It is quoted otherwise as 2% of the flow rate at Parteen, so nothing really. I would imagine it will keep the reservoirs full in Dublin and elsewhere. In the meantime, the leakage in Dublin is being tackled, but the actual usage is increasing. So, more supply is needed.

    Any plans to build more reservoirs?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 316 ✭✭tppytoppy


    This thread is a perfect example of the contempt in which rural dwellers are held by urbanites.

    How dare rural dwellers object to them subduing the country and exercising dominion over it.

    If you are not offended you should be.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,250 ✭✭✭MacDanger


    I haven't read into the details but I presume that 2% figure is referring to the average daily draw as a % of the average daily flow? If you're to look at the worst case scenario though, it's the maximum daily draw at the minimum daily flow to that needs to be considered to get an idea of the possible effects on the river.

    On top of that, you'd need to build in expected increases in that required maximum draw (due to increasing population in the Dublin region) along with any expected reductions (perhaps longer periods without rain due to climate change?) in the minimum daily flow. As I said, if at some point, there's a conflict in terms of where the water is needed, you can be sure that it won't be staying in the river.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,712 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    You do have a point, but only if the maximum rate quoted is not the maximum possible with the design of pipe used. The actual draw would be considerably below that.

    Also, if the pipe is not big enough, they could use a second one from somewhere else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,324 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    I have actually heard a protester use that exact phrase '- not a drop for Dublin' or words to that effect.

    These protests attract all manner of people with all manner of agendas. And of course the most "out there" agendas get the sound bites. I'm not denying there is a handful of people who simply don't want something else going to Dublin, but in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't get into the top ten of reasons why some people are against this.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,791 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Exactly this, and cynical local politicians whipping up opposition for their own gains.

    It is very deliberately painted as water for Dublin, rather than water for the midlands, Tipperary, Kildare, Wicklow and Dublin.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 316 ✭✭tppytoppy


    I saw in the last month a local quarry being denied permission to expand in case it damages the water table

    Dubliners don't care the damage they may do in securing access to the resources of other regions.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭db


    https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/environment/2019155/river-shannon-at-a-crossroads-10-billion-water-pipeline-to-dublin-or-salmon-restoration-in-limerick.html

    This is an article about the risks to Lough Derg and the river at Castleconnell if this pipeline goes ahead. If anyone thinks they will suspend the abstraction during a drought or the rate of abstraction will not increase over time, they are being naive.



Advertisement
Advertisement