Pylons

Birdnuts · 16-01-2014 10:02PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

I've read it and my last post broke down the statement. It's hardly the stinging attack that you wish it was.

They have expressed serious concerns about the routing of these projects from a landscape point of view. You claimed there was no issues in that regard

Foxtrol · 16-01-2014 10:10PM

Birdnuts wrote: »

They have expressed serious concerns about the routing of these projects from a landscape point of view. You claimed there was no issues in that regard

You stated they had concerns about the project as a whole, not one aspect of it (the landscape). Surely if it wasn't needed at all, as you claim, they'd come out and say it when all they've said it needs to be assessed properly which I dont think anyone would disagree with.

Greensleeves · 16-01-2014 10:10PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Just have to point out that Dublin has pylons, and it's never seemed an issue for the people so up in arms about them now, but let's leave this aside for a minute. I really just want to correct your comment, is all - rural Ireland is not at all the only or overwhelming reason people visit here. Dublin is the most popular tourist destination in the country, followed by Galway City, followed by Cork City, followed by Limerick City.

The most popular free tourist attraction being the National Gallery (Dublin), followed by the Botanic Gardens (Dublin), followed by the National Museum of Archaeology (Dublin), followed by the Irish Museum of Modern Art (Dublin), followed by Farmleigh (Dublin), followed by the National Museum of Decorative Arts (Dublin), followed by the National Museum of Natural History (Dublin), followed by Chester Beatty Library (Dublin), followed by the Science Gallery (Dublin)... and FINALLY! followed by Holycross Abbey (Thurles).

The most popular paid attractions being the Guinness Storehouse (Dublin), then Dublin Zoo (Dublin), then the National Aquatic Centre (Dublin), and only then in fourth the Cliffs of Moher (Clare), followed by The Book of Kells (back to Dublin), Fota Wildlife Park (just outside Cork City) St Patrick's Cathedral (yep, Dublin), Blarney (Cork), Kilmainham Gaol (Dublin), and finally Bunratty Castle (Clare).

While we have some very popular rural sites, I'm sorry but Dublin is by far the biggest earner and the pylons here don't seem to have really done any damage at all too tourism. And I don't think anyone can honestly say they're expecting to see pylons placed near the the Cliffs of Moher, for example.

People typically come to Ireland because we do things a little different - for some historic stuff, some scenery, some music and culture, but ultimately for 'a bit of craic'. Some pylons are not going to change that.

I agree about the importance of Dublin but you are missing the point a bit. There are no pylons in the Botanic Gardens or in Merrion Square or Dame Street etc. and there would (rightly) be uproar if plans were put forward to install some.

I'm in the UK at the moment and I see lots of ads for holidays in Ireland promoting the Wild Atlantic Way, coach tours of The Beara Penninsula, The Ring of Kerry etc. Without fail they mention the wonderful scenery and the word "unspoilt" is usually included. This is what we are selling and unfortunately pylons and wind turbines are going to change that.

Foxtrol · 16-01-2014 10:14PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

I agree about the importance of Dublin but you are missing the point a bit. There are no pylons in the Botanic Gardens or in Merrion Square or Dame Street etc. and there would (rightly) be uproar if plans were put forward to install some.

I'm in the UK at the moment and I see lots of ads for holidays in Ireland promoting the Wild Atlantic Way, coach tours of The Beara Penninsula, The Ring of Kerry etc. Without fail they mention the wonderful scenery and the word "unspoilt" is usually included. This is what we are selling and unfortunately pylons and wind turbines are going to change that.

Are pylons planned to go through any of those areas advertised?

Foxtrol · 16-01-2014 10:16PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

The grid will presumably need to be upgraded in the future but none of the evidence points to any pressing requirement for the massive upgrade being suggested at present.

So we should piecemeal upgrade the system continuously? This is such typical Irish thinking, ‘sure we’ll worry about it when it comes around’.

Capt'n Midnight · 16-01-2014 10:28PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

Are pylons planned to go through any of those areas advertised?

Of course not, there is no room for them between the buildings and the cost of land in the city centre is something fierce. You'd have to spend several hundred thousand per pylon just to acquire the site and remove existing buildings.

Existing Grid - note there is a lot of 220KV pylons in Dublin Suburbs and surrounding towns
The black lines are 110KV lines - tall wooden poles rather than lattice metal pylons , green are 220KV and Red are the 400KV ones - they aren't everywhere, and
http://www.eirgrid.com/media/All-IslandTransmissionMap.pdf

Capt'n Midnight · 16-01-2014 10:35PM

For those fans of underground cables
http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/zahra/em_20121011/index.php?device=accessible&pg=26

The route initially proposed passed through a number of housing estates so as to avoid heavily trafficked roads

Foxtrol · 16-01-2014 10:45PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Of course not, there is no room for them between the buildings and the cost of land in the city centre is something fierce. You'd have to spend several hundred thousand per pylon just to acquire the site and remove existing buildings.

Existing Grid - note there is a lot of 220KV pylons in Dublin Suburbs and surrounding towns
The black lines are 110KV lines - tall wooden poles rather than lattice metal pylons , green are 220KV and Red are the 400KV ones - they aren't everywhere, and
http://www.eirgrid.com/media/All-IslandTransmissionMap.pdf

Sorry I didn't mean the sites in Dublin, I was talking about the rural ones that were mentioned by the poster as being advertised abroad - Wild Atlantic Way, coach tours of The Beara Penninsula, The Ring of Kerry etc. I could understand complaints if they were put through any of these or other important tourist site but there's not a chance of that happening.

I'd be pretty confident that the only time 99% of tourists will come into sight of any of the pylons on the finalised route will be when one goes overhead when they're driving down a motorway.

Capt'n Midnight · 17-01-2014 01:09AM

Foxtrol wrote: »

Sorry I didn't mean the sites in Dublin, I was talking about the rural ones that were mentioned by the poster as being advertised abroad - Wild Atlantic Way, coach tours of The Beara Penninsula, The Ring of Kerry etc. I could understand complaints if they were put through any of these or other important tourist site but there's not a chance of that happening.

I'd be pretty confident that the only time 99% of tourists will come into sight of any of the pylons on the finalised route will be when one goes overhead when they're driving down a motorway.

Like I said , they can look at the map , not even the wooden 110KV (black lines) that far west

http://www.eirgrid.com/media/All-IslandTransmissionMap.pdf

Yes you could replace the 400KV lines with 110KV ones, but you'd need LOTS of them ( each 400KV has IIRC 4 cables per phase on each side of the tower, so that's eight times as many and then times four again since you are only running at 1/4 voltage)

Mountainsandh · 18-01-2014 12:10PM

Billy86 wrote: »

While we have some very popular rural sites, I'm sorry but Dublin is by far the biggest earner and the pylons here don't seem to have really done any damage at all too tourism. And I don't think anyone can honestly say they're expecting to see pylons placed near the the Cliffs of Moher, for example.

People typically come to Ireland because we do things a little different - for some historic stuff, some scenery, some music and culture, but ultimately for 'a bit of craic'. Some pylons are not going to change that.

Your last paragraph is your opinion, and not necessarily what the average tourist wants.
There is no way all the French people I know who came to visit Ireland as tourists "ultimately" came for "a bit of craic". Do you think most German people who come over are ultimately looking for the "bit of craic" ? Asian tourists ? Continental Europe tourists ?

That sounds like some people visiting from UK to go drink in Templebar tbh , and I don't think that is representative of tourists who actually visit the country (as opposed to Dublin only).

Of course it is very difficult to officially quantify people who come over to enjoy the scenery and rural areas of Ireland, because thankfully most of these are still free to enjoy.

So, for as long as there is no tourniquet/fee paying entry into the Comeragh Mountains, or coastal cliffs, or wooded domains, you will be able to claim that such and such museum are what tourists most visit. (long may it last)

Mountainsandh · 18-01-2014 12:17PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

Sorry I didn't mean the sites in Dublin, I was talking about the rural ones that were mentioned by the poster as being advertised abroad - Wild Atlantic Way, coach tours of The Beara Penninsula, The Ring of Kerry etc. I could understand complaints if they were put through any of these or other important tourist site but there's not a chance of that happening.

I'd be pretty confident that the only time 99% of tourists will come into sight of any of the pylons on the finalised route will be when one goes overhead when they're driving down a motorway.

There is a line planned that will be highly visible from the Comeragh Mountains/Mahon Falls area, and from the Waterford Cork road that leads to them.

Tourists are being encouraged in other areas than the well known and accepted ones, co Waterford and Wexford for example have been actively trying to up their tourism potential. The lines crossing both counties in scenic areas are spoiling all the efforts made in recent years.

Billy86 · 18-01-2014 12:37PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Your last paragraph is your opinion, and not necessarily what the average tourist wants.
There is no way all the French people I know who came to visit Ireland as tourists "ultimately" came for "a bit of craic". Do you think most German people who come over are ultimately looking for the "bit of craic" ? Asian tourists ? Continental Europe tourists ?

That sounds like some people visiting from UK to go drink in Templebar tbh , and I don't think that is representative of tourists who actually visit the country (as opposed to Dublin only).

Of course it is very difficult to officially quantify people who come over to enjoy the scenery and rural areas of Ireland, because thankfully most of these are still free to enjoy.

So, for as long as there is no tourniquet/fee paying entry into the Comeragh Mountains, or coastal cliffs, or wooded domains, you will be able to claim that such and such museum are what tourists most visit. (long may it last)

It's also reflected in the statistics I showed (which includes free destinations, and 'a bit of craic' does not mean going down to the pub - it means the general approach to life here. That can be a trad pub, or staying in a B&B, the banter on street markets, or just the general nature of people around the whole country.

Basically though, if people are claiming that pylons will do "so much damage" to tourism, I'd appreciate if they could provide some evidence for this (especially as nobody is talking about building pylons in the Burren or on the Cliffs of Moher). Dublin has plenty of pylons, yet we bring in more tourist money than anywhere else in the country by a large margin.

And it's also funny to me how many people who claim to be such 'purists' for the 'beauty of the landscape'... live in places like this, this, or this.

Mountainsandh · 18-01-2014 01:16PM

Billy86 wrote: »

It's also reflected in the statistics I showed (which includes free destinations, and 'a bit of craic' does not mean going down to the pub - it means the general approach to life here. That can be a trad pub, or staying in a B&B, the banter on street markets, or just the general nature of people around the whole country.

Basically though, if people are claiming that pylons will do "so much damage" to tourism, I'd appreciate if they could provide some evidence for this (especially as nobody is talking about building pylons in the Burren or on the Cliffs of Moher). Dublin has plenty of pylons, yet we bring in more tourist money than anywhere else in the country by a large margin.

And it's also funny to me how many people who claim to be such 'purists' for the 'beauty of the landscape'... live in places like this, this, or this.

And again it's very difficult to quantify where there are less or no paying attractions. Again with the tourist money in Dublin reference you are alluding to fee paying areas and the obvious city centre revenue.

Of course there's plenty of "European city break" type of tourists, but there are also a lot of tourists who come for the entire country, not just Dublin.

Pylons in a town blend in as part of the city's infrastructure. People expect infrastructure in towns. People are not going to be shocked at infrastructure in towns, because that is usually the starting point for a town. Wherever you conglomerate people, habitat and industry, you are going to have a more present infrastructure. The better infrastructure, the more likely the town is to develop into a larger urban centre.
In fact, the abondance of infrastructure can be an incentive for people to settle in towns : transport, industry...

So really, I just don't get the point of harping on about pylons in Dublin. Ok, yes, there are pylons in Dublin, just like Paris, Madrid, Milan, presumably.

As regards you last paragraphs with pics, it has been discussed here often, and no one thinks that the sprawl of one off housing was a good idea in the first place, is that an excuse to trash what remains of scenery ?

But I am bemused that you seem to think that the notion of a scenic area attractive to tourists would categorically exclude buildings.

Scale is important.

A farm in the Beara peninsula, with accompanying electricity poles and regional road is acceptable, because the scale is right.

To be honest, I think the whole hooha about this project has simply arisen as a result of the disproportionate scale of it.

I think people involved in planning for renewable energy schemes in their enthusiasm, zeal, and greed, are refusing to acknowledge that the scale of the projects considered is often disproportionate for the size of Ireland.

The scale of the upgrades is what is causing the outcry, not the need for the upgrade.

darkpagandeath · 18-01-2014 06:11PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

And again it's very difficult to quantify where there are less or no paying attractions. Again with the tourist money in Dublin reference you are alluding to fee paying areas and the obvious city centre revenue.

Of course there's plenty of "European city break" type of tourists, but there are also a lot of tourists who come for the entire country, not just Dublin.

Pylons in a town blend in as part of the city's infrastructure. People expect infrastructure in towns. People are not going to be shocked at infrastructure in towns, because that is usually the starting point for a town. Wherever you conglomerate people, habitat and industry, you are going to have a more present infrastructure. The better infrastructure, the more likely the town is to develop into a larger urban centre.
In fact, the abondance of infrastructure can be an incentive for people to settle in towns : transport, industry...

So really, I just don't get the point of harping on about pylons in Dublin. Ok, yes, there are pylons in Dublin, just like Paris, Madrid, Milan, presumably.

As regards you last paragraphs with pics, it has been discussed here often, and no one thinks that the sprawl of one off housing was a good idea in the first place, is that an excuse to trash what remains of scenery ?

But I am bemused that you seem to think that the notion of a scenic area attractive to tourists would categorically exclude buildings.

Scale is important.

A farm in the Beara peninsula, with accompanying electricity poles and regional road is acceptable, because the scale is right.

To be honest, I think the whole hooha about this project has simply arisen as a result of the disproportionate scale of it.

I think people involved in planning for renewable energy schemes in their enthusiasm, zeal, and greed, are refusing to acknowledge that the scale of the projects considered is often disproportionate for the size of Ireland.

The scale of the upgrades is what is causing the outcry, not the need for the upgrade.

I think a lot of people get confused as Wind power is expensive atm. And yes it is but guess what wind is not a finite resource like coal/oil there will be a point where the investment pays off and a tipping point were wind is a lot cheaper than coal/oil. And we can benefit for exporting it as well as reasonable energy prices. Energy prices will never go down they are just going up.

Capt'n Midnight · 18-01-2014 07:34PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

A farm in the Beara peninsula, with accompanying electricity poles and regional road is acceptable, because the scale is right.

That makes no sense to me.

First of all there are no 400KV pylons destined for there. Nor 220KV ones, not even 110KV ones. There is not sufficient demand for electricity there
http://www.eirgrid.com/media/All-IslandTransmissionMap.pdf

The Beara peninsula has mountains that would dwarf any pylons if a sense of scale is needed. Also still has old abandoned mine works.

This isn't about sticking pylons everywhere.

With all the fuss over tourists I'll just mention that eco tourists might have a preference for electric cars https://www.esb.ie/electric-cars/electric-car-charging/electric-car-charge-point-map.jsp

Mountainsandh · 18-01-2014 09:10PM

The reference to the Beara peninsula is simply because Billy86 linked to a pic of a farm on the Beara peninsula, suggesting that the house in question was intrusive on the landscape.

I am not suggesting they are proposing pylons on the Beara peninsula.

And it's also funny to me how many people who claim to be such 'purists' for the 'beauty of the landscape'... live in places like this, this, or this.

Capt'n Midnight · 18-01-2014 10:20PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

The reference to the Beara peninsula is simply because Billy86 linked to a pic of a farm on the Beara peninsula, suggesting that the house in question was intrusive on the landscape.

I am not suggesting they are proposing pylons on the Beara peninsula.

TBH a distinctive white house stands out more than pylons. Because they pylons are a neutral shade of grey and are all alike. Once you've seen one you've seen them all.

And they become like any other street furniture, although bigger they are still forgettable unless you focus on them, have a good look next time you are out for fixtures and fittings on streets, all the junction boxes, transformers, shore covers, poles for traffic lights, cameras, telephone, power, pedestrian lights, overhead lights, bollards, cabinets. Just look out for the number of green metal boxes beside our roads, hydrants , bus stops and associated ad spaces and cell phone masts, and weather stations.

Many of which give a higher dose of thingy* to pedestrians passing by than a pylon in the next field ever would.

*thingy = bad kind of electricity , magnetic monopoles, cancer rays, audible hum , karma

Blahblah2012 · 18-01-2014 10:41PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

TBH a distinctive white house stands out more than pylons. Because they pylons are a neutral shade of grey and are all alike. Once you've seen one you've seen them all.

And they become like any other street furniture, although bigger they are still forgettable unless you focus on them, have a good look next time you are out for fixtures and fittings on streets, all the junction boxes, transformers, shore covers, poles for traffic lights, cameras, telephone, power, pedestrian lights, overhead lights, bollards, cabinets. Just look out for the number of green metal boxes beside our roads, hydrants , bus stops and associated ad spaces and cell phone masts, and weather stations.

Many of which give a higher dose of thingy* to pedestrians passing by than a pylon in the next field ever would.

*thingy = bad kind of electricity , magnetic monopoles, cancer rays, audible hum , karma

That post must have come from the top down. Good man Enda.

To compare drab and sh1tty looking pylons with a house that more than likely has character (even if it isn't to everyone's liking) is rediculous.
Pylons are imposing to say the least and not something anybody other than an esb engineer or a person who has a pylon fetish(and there's a few of you on here) wants to look at or be around.

Mountainsandh · 19-01-2014 01:50AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

TBH a distinctive white house stands out more than pylons. Because they pylons are a neutral shade of grey and are all alike. Once you've seen one you've seen them all.

That's a matter of opinion.

I agree with blahblah, to me there is no comparison.

An old farmhouse, a traditional looking house, is a much nicer thing to look at than a pylon, and has a place in the scenery.

A pylon serves a function but should be hidden, like a bra. :P

I have asked you the question before CM but you chose to ignore it : if you were to frame a photograph, and you had the option to include a pylon in the scenery, or reframe and avoid having the pylon in your pic, what would you do ?

If you had the option to frame in a house, or a pylon, what would you do ?

If you took both pics, and asked the majority of the Irish and foreign population which they like best, pylon pic, or house pic, which do you think they would choose ?

Capt'n Midnight · 19-01-2014 01:06PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

That's a matter of opinion.

I agree with blahblah, to me there is no comparison.

An old farmhouse, a traditional looking house, is a much nicer thing to look at than a pylon, and has a place in the scenery.

No one on this thread has problems with old traditional looking houses.

It's the godawful bungalow blitz extra brite white "LOOK AT ME" blights on the landscape people don't like.

I have asked you the question before CM but you chose to ignore it : if you were to frame a photograph, and you had the option to include a pylon in the scenery, or reframe and avoid having the pylon in your pic, what would you do ?

If you had the option to frame in a house, or a pylon, what would you do ?

If you took both pics, and asked the majority of the Irish and foreign population which they like best, pylon pic, or house pic, which do you think they would choose ?

The technical answer is to adjust the focus so the pylon in the background disappears but the house stays in focus :pac:

TBH I wouldn't care

And I've posted pic of pylon's at Turlogh Hill in this thread, at their closest point to the road at the top of the gap, they just don't stand out unless you go looking for them.

You have to remember some of us can look at a wind turbine and associated pylons and realise that it means 20% (24% in December) less smoke coming out of power plant chimneys. If you can't understand that pylons are the lesser of two evils then you'll have to explain the fable of the dog in the manger because I never really got it.

Mountainsandh · 19-01-2014 02:26PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

No one on this thread has problems with old traditional looking houses.

It's the godawful bungalow blitz extra brite white "LOOK AT ME" blights on the landscape people don't like.

The technical answer is to adjust the focus so the pylon in the background disappears but the house stays in focus :pac:

TBH I wouldn't care

And I've posted pic of pylon's at Turlogh Hill in this thread, at their closest point to the road at the top of the gap, they just don't stand out unless you go looking for them.
.

Sigh. Explain to me exactly how you are going to keep that one nicely unfocused...

That's a quick runaway pic of google maps, don't quite have the time to find a more scenic area.
(please check attached pics)

Not all spots are like Turlough Hill, where there is a backdrop, and tbh I thought the pylons were intrusive and ugly there as well.

Look, pylons are going to ruin some scenery, there's no two ways about that, the question is, to what extent.

Again, if the scale of this project is not justified for the good of everyone, then it should not go ahead as is. Simple as.

Problem is, we don't know that because Eirgrid are not telling us.

What is needed for a simple Irish upgrade ?

What part of this project is to accommodate wind energy for sale abroad by private developpers ?

Why should your average Joe Soap have to see his B&B, hotel, or simply house devalued for the benefit of said private developpers ?

That you tell me Joe Soap has to see his property/business devalued because it's in everyone's interest is one thing, it can be accepted, it can be explained and justified.

If you tell me that the private developpers selling wind energy is going to benefit Joe Soap, then you have to show me how.

Eirgrid have not delivered on this yet.

JRant · 19-01-2014 02:42PM

Blahblah2012 wrote: »

That post must have come from the top down. Good man Enda.

To compare drab and sh1tty looking pylons with a house that more than likely has character (even if it isn't to everyone's liking) is rediculous.
Pylons are imposing to say the least and not something anybody other than an esb engineer or a person who has a pylon fetish(and there's a few of you on here) wants to look at or be around.

Never has a username been more apt.

You've basically contradicted yourself here. On one hand the houses are a matter of taste and you're fine with that. Then you go on to say that anyone who doesn't mind the pylons has a fetish.

It's going to really irk you when they do go up and they most certainly will.

JRant · 19-01-2014 02:53PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Sigh. Explain to me exactly how you are going to keep that one nicely unfocused... That's a quick runaway pic of google maps, don't quite have the time to find a more scenic area.
(please check attached pics)

Not all spots are like Turlough Hill, where there is a backdrop, and tbh I thought the pylons were intrusive and ugly there as well.

Look, pylons are going to ruin some scenery, there's no two ways about that, the question is, to what extent.

Again, if the scale of this project is not justified for the good of everyone, then it should not go ahead as is. Simple as.

Problem is, we don't know that because Eirgrid are not telling us.

What is needed for a simple Irish upgrade ?

What part of this project is to accommodate wind energy for sale abroad by private developpers ?

Why should your average Joe Soap have to see his B&B, hotel, or simply house devalued for the benefit of said private developpers ?

That you tell me Joe Soap has to see his property/business devalued because it's in everyone's interest is one thing, it can be accepted, it can be explained and justified.

If you tell me that the private developpers selling wind energy is going to benefit Joe Soap, then you have to show me how.

Eirgrid have not delivered on this yet.

Here you go,

http://www.eirgrid.com/media/Grid%2025.pdf

have a proper read of this and it will answer a lot of your questions.

Unfortunately you seem to think this is all some big ploy by private investers at the poor rural dwelers expense.

Blahblah2012 · 19-01-2014 04:00PM

JRant wrote: »

Never has a username been more apt.

Glasshouses and stones Rant boy!!

JRant wrote: »

You've basically contradicted yourself here. On one hand the houses are a matter of taste and you're fine with that. Then you go on to say that anyone who doesn't mind the pylons has a fetish.

I'm comfortable with most houses that were built to a high spec and within regulations.
As for your pylon fetish query..I said that nobody other than an esb engineer or someone with a pylon fetish wanted to look at or be around one.
You clearly fall into that bracket as its obvious enough you aren't an esb engineer.

JRant wrote: »

It's going to really irk you when they do go up and they most certainly will.

A mind of a child being quite clear here little boy.

Greensleeves · 19-01-2014 05:08PM

JRant wrote: »

Here you go,

http://www.eirgrid.com/media/Grid%2025.pdf

have a proper read of this and it will answer a lot of your questions.

Unfortunately you seem to think this is all some big ploy by private investers at the poor rural dwelers expense.

That PDF answers the questions all right. It was produced in 2008 and the introduction by Eamon Ryan says:

"The last few years have seen extraordinary changes in global electricity markets, as climate change and energy security have moved to the top of policy imperatives at home, in Europe and across the world.

The Strategy, when implemented in full, will provide a platform so that in each region of Ireland we can harness our abundant renewable energy resources and provide clean and competitively priced electricity for homes, businesses and new high-tech industries."

Back in 2008 this may have made economic sense but in 2014 it is abundantly clear that wind energy is inefficient and expensive and without subsidies is uneconomical. At a time when the EU is moving away from binding renewable energy targets it would be daft to spend so much money on "future-proofing" our grid to accomodate wind energy.

EU renewable energy targets to be significantly scaled back

EC decision could undermine Government’s rationale for construction of pylons and wind farms

The European Commission is to significantly scale back its mandatory renewable energy targets from 2020, which could undermine a key aspect of the Government’s rationale for the construction of pylons and its move towards wind energy as part of the strengthening of the national grid.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/eu-renewable-energy-targets-to-be-significantly-scaled-back-1.1658122

darkpagandeath · 19-01-2014 05:33PM

Some interesting comments by the anti side if you scroll down on that article.. Medication to sleep ?

Mountainsandh · 19-01-2014 07:34PM

JRant wrote: »

Here you go,

http://www.eirgrid.com/media/Grid%2025.pdf

have a proper read of this and it will answer a lot of your questions.

Unfortunately you seem to think this is all some big ploy by private investers at the poor rural dwelers expense.

I am well able to find these documents, and had read this, and this does not answer my questions.

This is an enthusiastic summary of what needs to be done, giving a vague idea that "Significantly Higher Renewable Generation Capacity Levels" are needed.

It does not anywhere in this document, or other pdfs available online, state what are the clear proportions of domestic needs vs export needs.

You don't seem to quite grab my meaning : how much of an upgrade does Ireland need to cater for itself, renewable or otherwise ?

The upgrade we are offered is that which includes export needs as well as Irish needs.

Export demands on the system are likely to be pretty high to make exporting worthwhile.

So the current upgrade includes :

costs to upgrade for ourselves (renewables and others) + costs to upgrade so renewable energy can be exported.
environment impact for ourselves + environment impact for exports

My question again is : what are costs to upgrade for ourselves + extent of environment impact for ourselves ?

This document does not address this.
It tells me that "significantly higher renewable generation levels" are needed.

Eirgrid is simply not clear.

Please let me know if you find the answer to this question, there is a lot of reading on that site, and I may have missed it. If it is there, then why not state it clearly and simply, and publicize it, so people have a clearer idea of what's going on ?

joela · 19-01-2014 08:09PM

Why don't you just write to Eirgrid and ask these questions? They are the people who can answer you so why keep asking on a thread like this when you can get it from the horses mouth? I think it is probably because you know you won't like what you hear and the facts will not support your particular brand of nimbyism and my goodness you are a nimby extraordinaire. Furthermore you are single person from France, you do not live there anymore it seems so are unlikely to be up to date with French policy in terms of planning and environment other than at the most superficial level so please stop talking about France as if your opinion speaks for all France. You live in Ireland in a one-off house it seems so how can you really condemn grid upgrade when the dispersed settlement patterns in ireland are part of the reason our grid needs to sprawl so much.

You need to learn a bit more about planning and environmental laws here, as well as doing an electrical engineering degree if you are going to speak with authority on the technical aspects of the grid upgrade. That goes for all the nimbys on this thread who are practising Google science and engineering 101. It is extremely irritating to keep reading the conspiracy theories of BlahBlahBlah who is abusive to anyone who challenges his opinions and reasoning. Newsflash* some of us have qualifications in planning, environment, grid engineering, renewables and more so we may know a little bit more than you about environmental laws, grid capacity etc.* Open to debate but please take a moment to listen to some of the people on here who obviously have technical expertise in relevant areas. Hysteria, emotive commentary and scaremongering will not win this issue, people must use facts, science, evidence based arguments and the planning system if they wish to make themselves heard and not be labelled as nimbys.

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I am well able to find these documents, and had read this, and this does not answer my questions.

This is an enthusiastic summary of what needs to be done, giving a vague idea that "Significantly Higher Renewable Generation Capacity Levels" are needed.

It does not anywhere in this document, or other pdfs available online, state what are the clear proportions of domestic needs vs export needs.

You don't seem to quite grab my meaning : how much of an upgrade does Ireland need to cater for itself, renewable or otherwise ?

The upgrade we are offered is that which includes export needs as well as Irish needs.

Export demands on the system are likely to be pretty high to make exporting worthwhile.

So the current upgrade includes :

costs to upgrade for ourselves (renewables and others) + costs to upgrade so renewable energy can be exported.
environment impact for ourselves + environment impact for exports

My question again is : what are costs to upgrade for ourselves + extent of environment impact for ourselves ?

This document does not address this.
It tells me that "significantly higher renewable generation levels" are needed.

Eirgrid is simply not clear.

Please let me know if you find the answer to this question, there is a lot of reading on that site, and I may have missed it. If it is there, then why not state it clearly and simply, and publicize it, so people have a clearer idea of what's going on ?

Mountainsandh · 19-01-2014 08:52PM

joela wrote: »

Why don't you just write to Eirgrid and ask these questions? They are the people who can answer you so why keep asking on a thread like this when you can get it from the horses mouth? I think it is probably because you know you won't like what you hear and the facts will not support your particular brand of nimbyism and my goodness you are a nimby extraordinaire. Furthermore you are single person from France, you do not live there anymore it seems so are unlikely to be up to date with French policy in terms of planning and environment other than at the most superficial level so please stop talking about France as if your opinion speaks for all France. You live in Ireland in a one-off house it seems so how can you really condemn grid upgrade when the dispersed settlement patterns in ireland are part of the reason our grid needs to sprawl so much.

You need to learn a bit more about planning and environmental laws here, as well as doing an electrical engineering degree if you are going to speak with authority on the technical aspects of the grid upgrade. That goes for all the nimbys on this thread who are practising Google science and engineering 101. It is extremely irritating to keep reading the conspiracy theories of BlahBlahBlah who is abusive to anyone who challenges his opinions and reasoning. Newsflash* some of us have qualifications in planning, environment, grid engineering, renewables and more so we may know a little bit more than you about environmental laws, grid capacity etc.* QUOTE]

Wow you really hate me.

Again, the pylons are not passing in my backyard.

I have always made it clear that I talk about what feedback my French family and friends give me, and I have not talked about French policies in term of planning and development other than what I know from going back there on a regular basis, as well as reading information on the RTE site (http://www.rte-france.com/fr/) and other French information sites. I read a lot, and as time allows, I try to read what is relevant to discussions I might take part in online. Being French brings in some perspective, just like an Irish person who has lived abroad for a while will have a different perspective to someone who has spent their entire life in Ireland.

Writing to Eirgrid is a great idea, but fortunately the questions I am presenting here are being asked by community representatives currently involved in these discussions, who have a better chance of getting an answer.

I am not talking about technical aspects of the upgrade, in fact when CM and other knowledgeable people put forward technical data I read and take a step back, please check back. When I offer a suggestion on a technical aspect, it is likely to be based on something tangible that I have read about on a credible document, not speculation.

Open to debate but please take a moment to listen to some of the people on here
who obviously have technical expertise in relevant areas. Hysteria, emotive
commentary and scaremongering will not win this issue, people must use facts,
science, evidence based arguments and the planning system if they wish to make
themselves heard and not be labelled as nimbys.[/

I don't know what exactly you find hysterical, emotive commentary-like, and scaremongering in my posts.
I am certainly enthusiastic, and idealistic. I think the pragmatic approach is lending itself too much to exploitation and money making schemes right now, when it comes to renewables especially, and some vision and idealism are needed to balance it.

The pragmatic approach seems to make little of what's important to people. Of course if you are downright pragmatic it makes total sense to plant the infrastructure and reap the benefits.
However there is a human dimension in all this, and not all people are that pragmatic, so some people like myself are trying to pass on the message that some things that are not important to others are indeed important to us, and shoud not be obliterated.

Like said in the linked pdf above :

Striking a balance
Eirgrid has a statutory obligation to balance the provision of reliable transmission services with the costs to the final customer and with the impact of transmission infrastructure on the environment.

Balance is needed.

joela by the way, I am as entitled to post here as anyone else be they engineers or housewives.

Capt'n Midnight · 19-01-2014 09:08PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Sigh. Explain to me exactly how you are going to keep that one nicely unfocused... That's a quick runaway pic of google maps, don't quite have the time to find a more scenic area.
(please check attached pics)

Taken from almost directly under the wires. When they are further away they are less intrusive.

Small, Far Away.

The pylons are visible because the hedgerow has been cut back. Further ahead the trees would block the view. And there are other wooden poles up there too.

Again, if the scale of this project is not justified for the good of everyone, then it should not go ahead as is. Simple as.

Like I said 24% of Decembers power came from wind.

Like I said earlier we get 20% of power from renewables and the target is 40%. Scotland are already at 40% so totally doable. Like I said there is a limit of 800MW generation in the Cork are at present. Our population is growing. Appartments use electric heating rather than gas because safety regs. cost money. People are getting bigger TV's and more gadgets. Electricity demand is constantly going up. Like I said the original Shannon Scheme would only provide 2% of our peak demand today.

I'm sure I've mentioned before about the new higher temperature aluminum alloy cable can run hotter and so allow more power on the same line, lots of sections of the existing network have been upgraded, using the same pylons, but you can only go so far with that

There are also the concepts of redundancy and future proofing.

TBH if we wanted to remove all human impact on the land we'd have to cover most of the country with oak forests.

We live in a democracy. And the question is "how much extra are you prepared to pay on your ESB bill to pacify the fears of a few vocal complainers"

Pylons

Comments