Pylons

SeanW · 15-01-2014 11:03AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

What's making the retail price expensive is all the add ons renewables subsidies, not the masking the cost of the power itself.

FYP

JRant · 15-01-2014 12:01PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

From the Irish Times Tuesday 14/1/2014.

Roscommon campaigners say living with pylons is even worse than anticipated

Campaigners in Co Roscommon who lost a 12-year battle to block a high-voltage power line from going through their community have said that opponents of Grid 25 should know that the reality of living with pylons is even worse than they had anticipated.

The group has also criticised the “confusion” about the cost of the controversial 56km Flagford (Co Roscommon) to Srananagh” (Co Sligo) line, saying some of the figures provided suggest that the final bill was almost three times more than the original estimate in the ESB’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the planning application.

“And, funnily, the argument against underground is that it would cost three times more than overground,” said Frank Mulligan a farmer from Grange, Boyle.

The ESB yesterday confirmed that the final cost of the Flagford-Srananagh line was €91.9 million and said comparison with the EIS estimate (of almost €37 million) was not valid.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/roscommon-campaigners-say-living-with-pylons-is-even-worse-than-anticipated-1.1654158#.UtURg3J1LQo.twitter

Yeah those pylons must be a nightmare to live with. Just standing around all day, sure they won't even wash a dish, the lazy shïtes.

JRant · 15-01-2014 12:05PM

SeanW wrote: »

FYP

You do realise that it's not only renewables that are subsidised. Nuclear and fossil fuel are both very heavily subsidised.

Akrasia · 15-01-2014 12:52PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

From the Irish Times Tuesday 14/1/2014.

Roscommon campaigners say living with pylons is even worse than anticipated

Campaigners in Co Roscommon who lost a 12-year battle to block a high-voltage power line from going through their community have said that opponents of Grid 25 should know that the reality of living with pylons is even worse than they had anticipated.

The group has also criticised the “confusion” about the cost of the controversial 56km Flagford (Co Roscommon) to Srananagh” (Co Sligo) line, saying some of the figures provided suggest that the final bill was almost three times more than the original estimate in the ESB’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the planning application.

“And, funnily, the argument against underground is that it would cost three times more than overground,” said Frank Mulligan a farmer from Grange, Boyle.

The ESB yesterday confirmed that the final cost of the Flagford-Srananagh line was €91.9 million and said comparison with the EIS estimate (of almost €37 million) was not valid.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/roscommon-campaigners-say-living-with-pylons-is-even-worse-than-anticipated-1.1654158#.UtURg3J1LQo.twitter

From the linked article

“It sounds like a plane hovering

(that'll be a helicopter)

– we cannot open our window in the summer,” she said. “It is a constant low hum and it can go on for hours.”

That'll be the bees

It's funny how they complain about the 'humming' of the power lines but I can't complain about the stink when farmers spread slurry on their fields, or the sound of their cows mooing at the crack of dawn, or the obtrusive sound of a stream trickling constantly, day and night.

it's a nightmare living in the countryside.

hatrickpatrick · 15-01-2014 01:40PM

I'd hazard a guess here that the people who are complaining are not complaining purely because of pylons being built, they're complaining because they know that just like everything else in Ireland the government will half ass it.

Look at what's going on with Irish Water and you'll see what I mean.
In Ireland we go for the first and simplest solution that works. Our governments don't take the time to think it through and figure out the absolute best solution possible.
Even looking at the "giant human" shaped pylons posted in this thread, those are pretty cool, but do you think there's even the slightest possibility that anyone in government here would consider anything but the most generic solution possible?

micosoft · 15-01-2014 04:36PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

Would they be the same professional planners that the Government listened to during the building boom?

The economists Colm McCarthy and Richard Tol are very sceptical of the pylons/wind turbine plans.

Here's an extract from an article by McCarthy in the Independent back in December.

"The Irish Academy of Engineering produced a detailed report on this issue in June 2012. It concluded that the Government should do nothing in support of wind farms for export that would increase costs for Irish taxpayers or for Irish consumers. The Academy noted that: "At a time when capital for investment in Ireland is so scarce, it is critically important to minimise investment in public infrastructure such as transmission. Given that the Irish Government implicitly stands behind such investment by State-owned companies such as ESB and EirGrid, it must be realised that such investment competes directly with government investments in, for example, Irish health and education.""

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/colm-mccarthy/colm-mccarthy-case-for-wind-must-be-proven-on-costs-29798897.html

To be fair the Government did not listen to any professional planners during the boom. Councillors (at the behest of their electorate) voted to rezone vast swatches of land over the heads of their planners and county managers.

True - and there is a nuanced discussion to be had on that. The source of the independent story is here a presentation here: http://www.iae.ie/news/article/2011/jun/24/dublin-economics-workshop/
and better still their presentation to the energy committee here: http://www.iae.ie/site_media/pressroom/documents/2010/Mar/04/Joint_Oireachtas_Climate_Change_Report_-_March_2010.pdf and the Q&A session from that here: http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/CLJ2010030300004?opendocument

Both Kieran O'Brien and Don Moore are highly respected Engineers with a background in generation. That said - it's nuanced which unfortunately these AH debates aren't - they are not suggesting not upgraded the grid, just revaluating and reducing the investment. That's a fair and substantiated comment. They are particularly pro-gas - especially LPG. They also recommend overhauling planning though to stop Nimbyism (their example being Corrib).

They do argue a key point which is to accept climate change and build defences against it rather then trying to avoid it. Interesting point but the consequences would be mega scale projects (Dublin Bay barrier)....

Cienciano · 15-01-2014 04:46PM

I walk under a 220kv line every day. If it's wet, you can hear a faint hum if you're standing directly underneath them. The idea that you can't open your window is funny

Capt'n Midnight · 15-01-2014 06:42PM

One of the problems with wind is that you need backup in case the predicted wind doesn't blow.

The UK national grid have been keeping track of this http://www.gizmag.com/uk-national-grid-wind-data/28046/

For the 23,700 gigawatt-hours of electrical energy generated by wind in the UK between April 2011 and September 2012, only 22 GWh of electrical energy from fossil fuels "was needed to fill the gaps when the wind didn't blow,"

That's one thousandth of the energy generated by wind

Also of the 246 GWh reserve needed on the grid for the same period, only 22 GWh are thought to be due to the wind not blowing as forecast.

So over 90% of the use of reserve had nothing to do with wind. You still need grids whether you use wind power or not.

Greensleeves · 15-01-2014 06:52PM

micosoft wrote: »

True - and there is a nuanced discussion to be had on that. The source of the independent story is here a presentation here: http://www.iae.ie/news/article/2011/jun/24/dublin-economics-workshop/
and better still their presentation to the energy committee here: http://www.iae.ie/site_media/pressroom/documents/2010/Mar/04/Joint_Oireachtas_Climate_Change_Report_-_March_2010.pdf and the Q&A session from that here: http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/CLJ2010030300004?opendocument

Both Kieran O'Brien and Don Moore are highly respected Engineers with a background in generation. That said - it's nuanced which unfortunately these AH debates aren't - they are not suggesting not upgraded the grid, just revaluating and reducing the investment. That's a fair and substantiated comment. They are particularly pro-gas - especially LPG. They also recommend overhauling planning though to stop Nimbyism (their example being Corrib).

They do argue a key point which is to accept climate change and build defences against it rather then trying to avoid it. Interesting point but the consequences would be mega scale projects (Dublin Bay barrier)....

Thanks for the links. Interesting reads.

Zen65 · 15-01-2014 08:44PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Even looking at the "giant human" shaped pylons posted in this thread, those are pretty cool, but do you think there's even the slightest possibility that anyone in government here would consider anything but the most generic solution possible?

Government don't employ the engineers who plan or build the Transmission system; that's the job of EirGrid (to plan) and ESB Networks (to design & build). Those companies operate independently of government.

When the science / profession of engineering is taken away from the engineers and given to the masses (or their public representatives) to perform it's time to leave the country . . . in a boat or plane that was built by an engineer.

OK having said that I would agree that the pylons are not attractive, but in any country I've been to they have pylons and it never stopped tourists coming and it never stopped farming. We should really get over ourselves.

Zen65 · 15-01-2014 08:48PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

A lot of bother could be saved if Eirgrid could clarify precisely why the grid needs upgrading. If part of the upgrade involves renewable energy exports then just say so. It our domestic energy requirements are going to surge dramatically then tell the public why there is going to be such an increase in demand. For example, what are Eirgrid's future electricity requirement forecasts based on?

There's a technological advance called the internet where you can find a report by EirGrid which explains every bit of that. I don't think it saves any bother whatsoever, since even people who say they want to know the answer to those questions couldn't be bothered to find it and read it.

I sure hope EirGrid didn't spend €50m to get consultants to write that report!!

JRant · 15-01-2014 09:54PM

Zen65 wrote: »

Government don't employ the engineers who plan or build the Transmission system; that's the job of EirGrid (to plan) and ESB Networks (to design & build). Those companies operate independently of government.

When the science / profession of engineering is taken away from the engineers and given to the masses (or their public representatives) to perform it's time to leave the country . . . in a boat or plane that was built by an engineer.

OK having said that I would agree that the pylons are not attractive, but in any country I've been to they have pylons and it never stopped tourists coming and it never stopped farming. We should really get over ourselves.

It's also important to remember that Eirgrid and ESB Networks are very much independent of each other aswell.

You're right, they're not the prettiest things in the world but they do a job and do it well.

Also for anyone doubting just how expensive undergrounding is, if you take a stretch 100km long, 30m wide, 2m deep, you would need to shift 6,000,000 cubic meters of earth just to get them in. That's a whole lotta dirty and somebodies going to have to pay to move it.

Birdnuts · 15-01-2014 10:25PM

Zen65 wrote: »

). Those companies operate independently of government.
.

??? - we have a link on the previous page in which Eirgrid constantly refers to government policy on wind energy which also appears to be main reason for these pylon projects according to Eirgrid. The ESB was forced to raise its prices by a government quango a few years back to help the likes of Airtricity to enter the market. Government interference in these areas in the past 20 years now means Ireland has the 4th most expensive power bills in the EU. The likes of Eamonn Ryan who wrote the forward for Eirgrid's justification for these pylon projects has publically stated he wants us to follow Denmarks example ie. EU most expensive power bills

Knob Longman · 15-01-2014 10:31PM

Its worse now than anyone could predict, Some c*nt gave the Pylons drugs...And now they are getting nasty !!!

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2014/01/07/pylon-attacks-seven-year-old-boy-in-dublin/

Zen65 · 15-01-2014 10:56PM

Birdnuts wrote: »

??? - we have a link on the previous page in which Eirgrid constantly refers to government policy on wind energy which also appears to be main reason for these pylon projects according to Eirgrid. The ESB was forced to raise its prices by a government quango a few years back to help the likes of Airtricity to enter the market. Government interference in these areas in the past 20 years now means Ireland has the 4th most expensive power bills in the EU. The likes of Eamonn Ryan who wrote the forward for Eirgrid's justification for these pylon projects has publically stated he wants us to follow Denmarks example

Governments set policy.

Companies operate within that policy, but independently of government. So do you.

For example, Government sets a policy on the maximum amount of alcohol you can have in your system while driving. You regulate your own drinking & driving to abide by that policy.

Or, Government sets policy on the sale of incandescent light bulbs. Companies then change their offerings to provide CFL, LED & other technologies for lamps. You then decide whether to purchase these or import incandescents via Amazon.com

Government sets policy on the percentage of renewable energy we should have here, and EirGrid develop a plan to build infrastructure to facilitate this. Government don't select the option that EirGrid should choose. Government does not choose the route for the lines. Government does not design the pylons.

Government does put an obligation on CER to regulate the market so that EirGrid does not select options that will put upward pressure on the price of electricity.

Z

Birdnuts · 15-01-2014 11:01PM

Zen65 wrote: »

Governments set policy.

Companies operate within that policy, but independently of government. So do you.

For example, Government sets a policy on the maximum amount of alcohol you can have in your system while driving. You regulate your own drinking & driving to abide by that policy.

Or, Government sets policy on the sale of incandescent light bulbs. Companies then change their offerings to provide CFL, LED & other technologies for lamps. You then decide whether to purchase these or import incandescents via Amazon.com

Government sets policy on the percentage of renewable energy we should have here, and EirGrid develop a plan to build infrastructure to facilitate this. Government don't select the option that EirGrid should choose. Government does not choose the route for the lines. Government does not design the pylons.

Government does put an obligation on CER to regulate the market so that EirGrid does not select options that will put upward pressure on the price of electricity.

Z

You claimed Eirgrid were operating independently on best principles etc. My point is that they are operating under flawed government energy policies. Glad we can agree that the government is indeed setting the agenda when it comes to Eirgrid

keith16 · 16-01-2014 12:29PM

Zen65 wrote: »

OK having said that I would agree that the pylons are not attractive, but in any country I've been to they have pylons and it never stopped tourists coming and it never stopped farming. We should really get over ourselves.

What countries are these? Tourists come to Ireland to see the country, we don't have a big city tourism honey pot like Paris or NY.

Ireland is too small for the type of mega-industrial scale wind-farms / pylons that are going to be built.

They will wreck the landscape.

These farms could be placed off-shore, with the lines running underground. We are told the cost of doing this is too high. What about the intangible costs?

The most galling thing of all however, is this infrastructure is going to be of no benefit to Ireland whatsoever

- Short Term Jobs in construction only - no long term employment
- Energy generated is exported

I am by no means a NIMBY, but this thing is not good news.

Zen65 · 16-01-2014 02:57PM

keith16 wrote: »

The most galling thing of all however, is this infrastructure is going to be of no benefit to Ireland whatsoever

That's a really odd perspective to take.

Were you galled when Coca Cola opened a large plant in Mayo? That creates some employment, but almost all of the product is exported. That's our water, our gas (if they use gas) and our electricity being used for export.

What about all those Irish farms which export their produce? Very few jobs created there, and all of the sunlight, water, and land that these farms use is going into that.

Were you galled by the installation of interconnectors between Ireland and the UK? These are used to import energy now, but they will be the means by which any wind energy generated is exported in the future.

keith16 wrote: »

- Short Term Jobs in construction only - no long term employment
- Energy generated is exported

Not to mention the ongoing jobs in operation & maintenance, environmental monitoring, provision of telecommunications services, etc. What about money (in some cases) to landowners for the rental of sites?

Who owns these windfarms? Mostly they are owned by Irish companies (or international companies like Airtricity) who employ staff here and who pay taxes on their profits, and employ staff in these and other related activities. That's good for all of us, as it eases the tax burden we would otherwise endure.

Exports from Ireland are a good thing. Reducing imported energy is a significant balance-of-trade benefit, and turning imported energy into exported energy is good for our exchequer, which is good for taxpayers. Every export consumes some resource of the country; personally I think exporting wind energy is a minimal price to pay. Wind could become Ireland's oil, only without all those ugly / smelly oil wells and refineries, with their potential for major environmental damage. A few lines around the country will not blight the landscape. There are thousands of kilometres of Transmission lines around the country right now, but you don't see tourists turning away because of them. A few hundred km more won't make any difference.

keith16 wrote: »

I am by no means a NIMBY . .

Your post expresses the very essence of NIMBY-ism: You want wind turbines placed off-shore (economic madness in Ireland) and you want lines placed underground (triple the cost) but always at somebody else's expense. You want to enjoy the resources our country for yourself, and let somebody else pay the price for it!

Zen65 · 16-01-2014 02:59PM

Birdnuts wrote: »

My point is that they are operating under flawed government energy policies.

Can you explain what the flaws are? I did not get that from your posts.

keith16 · 16-01-2014 04:13PM

Zen65 wrote: »

That's a really odd perspective to take.

Were you galled when Coca Cola opened a large plant in Mayo? That creates some employment, but almost all of the product is exported. That's our water, our gas (if they use gas) and our electricity being used for export.

Apples and oranges. The sourcing and production of Coke is not a strategic interest the same way energy is. Even if you took all of the factories in Ireland and dumped them side by side, they wouldn't have the same impact on the landscape that these mega-turbines are going to.

Zen65 wrote: »

What about all those Irish farms which export their produce? Very few jobs created there, and all of the sunlight, water, and land that these farms use is going into that.

What about them? All of the water and sunlight? You mean, naturally occurring phenomena which the farms utilise?

Zen65 wrote: »

Were you galled by the installation of interconnectors between Ireland and the UK? These are used to import energy now, but they will be the means by which any wind energy generated is exported in the future.

Nothing illustrates the lack of strategic thinking - build an interconnector, and lets import what we need. Now lets build wind farms, and export what we don't?

The point is, this infrastructure doesn't have any real benefit in the same way other important infrastructure like roads have. They are built in the locality and they serve the locality.

Zen65 wrote: »

Not to mention the ongoing jobs in operation & maintenance, environmental monitoring, provision of telecommunications services, etc. What about money (in some cases) to landowners for the rental of sites?

The land owners were promised huge sums and will end up getting a pittance (if anything).

Zen65 wrote: »

Who owns these windfarms? Mostly they are owned by Irish companies (or international companies like Airtricity) who employ staff here and who pay taxes on their profits, and employ staff in these and other related activities. That's good for all of us, as it eases the tax burden we would otherwise endure.

We are enduring a relatively high tax burden, and nothing coming out of this project will do anything to change that. You are extremely naive if you think that it will. This is the sort of stuff that gets taught in L.C. business studies, but the reality is much different.

What would be good if the energy sourced from these farms was used to reduce or reliance on other sources of energy, and reduce our electricity bills. That is not going to happen.

Zen65 wrote: »

Exports from Ireland are a good thing. Reducing imported energy is a significant balance-of-trade benefit, and turning imported energy into exported energy is good for our exchequer, which is good for taxpayers. Every export consumes some resource of the country; personally I think exporting wind energy is a minimal price to pay. Wind could become Ireland's oil, only without all those ugly / smelly oil wells and refineries, with their potential for major environmental damage. A few lines around the country will not blight the landscape. There are thousands of kilometres of Transmission lines around the country right now, but you don't see tourists turning away because of them. A few hundred km more won't make any difference.

You are sadly mistaken. I wish it was just a few more transmission lines.

Wind will never become Irelands oil, even if we cover every last inch of ground in wind farms.

Zen65 wrote: »

Your post expresses the very essence of NIMBY-ism: You want wind turbines placed off-shore (economic madness in Ireland) and you want lines placed underground (triple the cost) but always at somebody else's expense. You want to enjoy the resources our country for yourself, and let somebody else pay the price for it!

Tell me how I am going to enjoy these resources exactly? I am nowhere near any of these things, and I still think they are a bad idea.

conorhal · 16-01-2014 04:34PM

Zen65 wrote: »

That's a really odd perspective to take.

Were you galled when Coca Cola opened a large plant in Mayo? That creates some employment, but almost all of the product is exported. That's our water, our gas (if they use gas) and our electricity being used for export.

A compact manufacturing plant off the Naas Road in an industrial park is is hardly obtrusive.

Zen65 wrote: »

What about all those Irish farms which export their produce? Very few jobs created there, and all of the sunlight, water, and land that these farms use is going into that.

Very few jobs? Or, one of the biggest sectors employing people that produces the second largest export market on the Island?

Tell me how many jobs you anticipate will be created to service 500 pylons?

Zen65 wrote: »

Were you galled by the installation of interconnectors between Ireland and the UK? These are used to import energy now, but they will be the means by which any wind energy generated is exported in the future.

And Imported. Dont forget imported, thus ensuring energy supply security and thus providing some benefit to the nation, and conveniently it is UNDERGROUND (or under the sea at lest) so it's not despoiling the countryside which resulted in nobody objecting to it.

Zen65 wrote: »

Your post expresses the very essence of NIMBY-ism: You want wind turbines placed off-shore (economic madness in Ireland) and you want lines placed underground (triple the cost) but always at somebody else's expense. You want to enjoy the resources our country for yourself, and let somebody else pay the price for it!

Well you're right it is NIMBYism, just not Irish NIMBYism. These are being built here because the British don't their countryside turned unto a tip. Speaking of tips and jobs, perhaps the UK could export all their rubbish to Kerry and we can turn the county into a superdump and give the unemployed jobs as rag pickers Then the french can use Donegal as a Nuclear waste silo and we can burn chemical weapons in the ill concieved incinerator in Dublin to ensure it turns an improbable profit!

Some people will take any ol crap for a buck.

Foxtrol · 16-01-2014 04:40PM

From all the hyperbole about wrecking tourism you’d swear they were putting up pylons in every field in the country. There’ll be a few corridors that will have them, just like certain corridors across the country have motorways, and the tourists will continue to come and not care.

Blahblah2012 · 16-01-2014 04:58PM

Conorhal and keith16....well said lads.

They(gov/eirgrid spin doctors on here) really are trying to sugar coat their rubbish but are drifting off into their own delirium in the process. Happy days. Hopefully the people see through this and see them for what they are.

Don't forget the past!!! These people were and are up to their necks in it.

Cienciano · 16-01-2014 05:07PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

From all the hyperbole about wrecking tourism you’d swear they were putting up pylons in every field in the country. There’ll be a few corridors that will have them, just like certain corridors across the country have motorways, and the tourists will continue to come and not care.

Was in Finland 3 years ago. People were great, but I'm not going back because I was driving from Helsinki to Turku and there were fecken pylons in a field. :pac:
Was going to head up north, but decided against it because I heard there was more pylons up there too.

Birdnuts · 16-01-2014 07:44PM

Zen65 wrote: »

Can you explain what the flaws are? I did not get that from your posts.

I posted plenty of links outlining my concerns - if you can't be bothered reading them then so be it.

Birdnuts · 16-01-2014 07:49PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

From all the hyperbole about wrecking tourism you’d swear they were putting up pylons in every field in the country. There’ll be a few corridors that will have them, just like certain corridors across the country have motorways, and the tourists will continue to come and not care.

Grid 25 is just the start of things. A grid based on windpower will require pylons stretching into every corner of Ireland and Eirgrid have admitted as much when asked about this in recent Sunday newspaper pieces.

Foxtrol · 16-01-2014 08:28PM

Birdnuts wrote: »

Grid 25 is just the start of things. A grid based on windpower will require pylons stretching into every corner of Ireland and Eirgrid have admitted as much when asked about this in recent Sunday newspaper pieces.

What like the upgraded road system that stretches to most corners of the country? That really has destroyed tourism.

I’m sure many tourists would love it if we all travelled around on horses and carts down along boreens to our thatched roof houses but if they have enough money to be traveling here they understand that we’re a first world nation that needs modern infrastructure and they won’t bat an eye at it unless it goes through the middle of a big tourist attraction and I have seen no evidence that there’s a chance of this happening.

Whenever I hear this ‘is only the start of things’ it just shows that they can’t make an argument for something they’re trying stop and have to bring hypothetical worse case scenarios in to muddy the waters. Deal with the issue that’s on the table now, the one that so many NIMBYs are protesting.

Foxtrol · 16-01-2014 08:36PM

I’d really love to know what proportion of home owners that are protesting this live in one off housing which is a much bigger blight on the countryside around the nation than a corridor of pylons. It’s such hypocrisy and NIMBYism at its best for them to complain about issues around planning when so many of their homes shouldn’t have been given permission in the first place.

'It’s fine for others to have to deal with my house in the middle of a scenic view but how dare they put up a pylon that will benefit everyone and ruin my view. Won’t someone please think of the tourists’.

Blahblah2012 · 16-01-2014 08:48PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

What like the upgraded road system that stretches to most corners of the country? That really has destroyed tourism.

Yes..and what engineering marvels they are....

Foxtrol wrote: »

I’m sure many tourists would love it if we all travelled around on horses and carts down along boreens to our thatched roof houses but if they have enough money to be traveling here they understand that we’re a first world nation that needs modern infrastructure and they won’t bat an eye at it unless it goes through the middle of a big tourist attraction and I have seen no evidence that there’s a chance of this happening.

Well they didn't show much respect for the hill of Tara and its surrounding area (that's of huge archaeological significance to this country) when they built the N3. Like woodquay etc..they did what suited them and fûck anything or anyone that got in their way

Foxtrol wrote: »

Whenever I hear this ‘is only the start of things’ it just shows that they can’t make an argument for something they’re trying stop and have to bring hypothetical worse case scenarios in to muddy the waters. Deal with the issue that’s on the table now, the one that so many NIMBYs are protesting.

Well fail safe has to focus on worst case scenarios. You're obviously not an engineer!!!

Blahblah2012 · 16-01-2014 08:59PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

I’d really love to know what proportion of home owners that are protesting this live in one off housing which is a much bigger blight on the countryside around the nation than a corridor of pylons

Probably not many. I'd sooner look at a house than a Feckin pylon though to be honest.

Foxtrol wrote: »

It’s such hypocrisy and NIMBYism at its best for them to complain about issues around planning when so many of their homes shouldn’t have been given permission in the first place.

Of course they shouldn't have been given permission for a house. The countryside is for pylons(get with the program)

Foxtrol wrote: »

'It’s fine for others to have to deal with my house in the middle of a scenic view but how dare they put up a pylon that will benefit everyone and ruin my view. Won’t someone please think of the tourists’.

Now that is a laugh..benefits everyone. Our current network benefits everyone as it is. The proposed network only benefits the few who have a vested interest in it.

Pylons

Comments