Nuclear - future for Ireland?

Wylfa power station can begin that promises 8,000 new jobs https://share.google/mmplk26Jw4FjPHZ9t

So the beginning of 3 rolls royce smrs in Anglesey wales ..

The point you are missing here is that it is not dunkenflaute alone that is the reason for this 37GW offshore hydrogen plan where we would be vastly over installing 37GW capacity at enormous expense to give us just 7.7GW for domestic usage. As well as that 7.7GW being just half our projected 2050 demand which this plan was supposedly to address. It’s because of the intermittent unreliable nature of renewables in general.

Not only would this plan bankrupt us on its own for the capital costs of this 37GW it would double the strike price for the electricity generated without including the hydrogen element which on its own is 3 times the current electricity strike price.

I directed you to smartgriddashboard. Give a man a fish...

Consumers private and business in Ireland are not paying wholesale prices

But thanks for highlighting how renewable operators who are not only massively subsidised by us but also rip us off and laugh at our stupidity to our faces with ever higher prices

Wind farms provided 41% of country's electricity in March https://share.google/iZyJbYQvCPYRxO0sy

You've prob all seen this rte piece -

41% is not insignificant - and at a time when natural gas price has spiked and availability is limited , every little counts ,

You can't count on renewables - i dont think anyone expects otherwise -the increasing number of grid scale batteries being connected , makes both gas and renewable generation more efficient,

Obviously though with more capital cost-

Interestingly these grid storage systems would also be necessary for nuclear - to help balance out peak and off peak , and to reduce the need for spinning reserve,

The other interesting thing is ireland is just starting down the repowering path for its early windfarms - what i hadnt realised till recently is that if a smaller number of new bigger turbines are installed ( to replace the current older turbines) - with a similar nameplate capacity - the actual power output tends to be significantly higher , as the larger blade area and taller towers tend to catch more wind,more often ..

If there is one thing the wind industry excels in it is coming up with meaningless phrases attempting to portray something which it is not. Repowering being the latest.

There is no repowering. As we have seen this is simply tearing down and scrapping turbines which have reached their end of life to be replaced by new turbines, new bases, new roadways etc. That is not repowering anything. It is building a completely new wind farm at a new capital cost and with a new increased strike price.

Something which due to their relative lifespans will occur at least three times during the lifespan of a nuclear plant, and due to the very large difference in their relevant capacity factors, along with this need for at least three large capital cost injections, prices wind out of the market compared to nuclear.

I already showed here earlier that for Empire Wind offshore wind farm, even Hinckley C operating at 50% capacity factor would generate cheaper electricity. And that did not take into account the extra inflation costs that would be a factor for those “Repowerings” of Empire Wind.

they delivered several years late and over budget with some.construction issues.

it’s repowering, grid connections are hard to get. So you are reusing the grid connection, land leases are in place, locals are less likely to object. So planning is far easier. It’s much more straightforward to repower a site. Strike price doesn’t necessary increase. You are coming out of REFIT and other payments.

At EOL turbines are expensive to maintain , and often you can’t support. You can only extend the life so far.