Pylons

darkpagandeath · 09-02-2014 07:34PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Again CM, have the people who have a pylon next to them already set up a group of any kind ? Are they vocal ? Are they asking for support ?

Do you think anti-pylon groups would tell either type (Environmental groups, people suffering existing pylons groups) to sod off ?

Is it current anti-pylon groups' responsibility to go dig out every person in Ireland who has a pylon next to their house and ask them to join ?

These remarks sound a bit like a child whinging "they won't play with me", while making no attempt to join whatsoever.

I think it's lost on the Anti side that fact of you cant just be Anti Pylon next to me only. If your anti pylon you have to be just as anti to any pylons everywhere not just selective. This is what i think annoys most people their selectively anti pylon. And the abuse of EMF being cancer causing (which it’s not), But only when there next to me attitude really gets people as well. If it’s bad for you surely it’s bad for everyone including people in the city not just people in the country.

Mountainsandh · 09-02-2014 07:38PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I think it's lost on the Anti side that fact of you cant just be Anti Pylon next to me only. If your anti pylon you have to be just as anti to any pylons everywhere not just selective. This is what i think annoys most people their selectively anti pylon. And the abuse of EMF being cancer causing (which it’s not), But only when there next to me attitude really gets people as well if it’s bad for you surely it’s bad for everyone including people in the city not just people in the country.

But again, please find me a quote that says just that from anti-pylon groups !

Again, this is assuming the responsibility is entirely on anti-pylon groups to spontaneously identify and represent all people who have pylons on their land in Ireland

Let all the people who have pylons on their land/near them join and speak up, no ? I'm sure some of them have done so already, I hope some of them have !

Imagine how much stronger that would make the voice of anti-pylon groups, to have some unhappy pylon afflicted members.

darkpagandeath · 09-02-2014 07:53PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

But again, please find me a quote that says just that from anti-pylon groups !

Again, this is assuming the responsibility is entirely on anti-pylon groups to spontaneously identify and represent all people who have pylons on their land in Ireland

Let all the people who have pylons on their land/near them join and speak up, no ? I'm sure some of them have done so already, I hope some of them have !

Imagine how much stronger that would make the voice of anti-pylon groups, to have some unhappy pylon afflicted members.

You mean like other groups that represent everyone affected by an issue and not just selecting a minority ? Like anti smoking groups for example they don't just say hey don't smoke outside that guys house/business it’s don't smoke outside anyone's house/business. They say its a health risk for everyone not just for that guy over there..

rustedtrumpet · 09-02-2014 08:15PM

"ridin' along singin' a song, next to a great big pylon"

Mountainsandh · 09-02-2014 08:22PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

You mean like other groups that represent everyone affected by an issue and not just selecting a minority ? Like anti smoking groups for example they don't just say hey don't smoke outside that guys house/business it’s don't smoke outside anyone's house/business. They say its a health risk for everyone not just for that guy over there..

Did any anti-pylon groups say the health risk was for them only, that it didn't apply to say, urban people ?

Have anti-pylon groups spoken about all these people already living happily with pylons on their land ?

darkpagandeath · 09-02-2014 08:32PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Did any anti-pylon groups say the health risk was for them only, that it didn't apply to say, urban people ?

Have anti-pylon groups spoken about all these people already living happily with pylons on their land ?

I only ever hear about it in relation to the big pylons that are going to be used in the Country.

Capt'n Midnight · 09-02-2014 08:49PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I only ever hear about it in relation to the big pylons that are going to be used in the Country.

What's the physics behind 440KV pylons being dangerous in rural areas a hundred meters away but 220KV is fine passing over gardens and commercial premises in more heavily populated urban areas

Mountainsandh · 09-02-2014 09:03PM

I have never heard anti-pylon groups excluding urban areas from discussions.

Again my take on it is that urban people, and other people who may be unhappy with the pylons next to them, are welcome to join anti-pylon groups and make their points, you know, stir things up for themselves too, if they so wish. Whatever line is affecting them.

I have genuinely never heard anti-pylon representatives excluding any section of the population from their points.
I guess the obvious starting point is with new pylons, since the group has been set up by people who are likely to have to deal with new or upgraded pylons. Makes sense.

darkpagandeath · 09-02-2014 09:18PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I have never heard anti-pylon groups excluding urban areas from discussions.

Again my take on it is that urban people, and other people who may be unhappy with the pylons next to them, are welcome to join anti-pylon groups and make their points, you know, stir things up for themselves too, if they so wish. Whatever line is affecting them.

I have genuinely never heard anti-pylon representatives excluding any section of the population from their points.
I guess the obvious starting point is with new pylons, since the group has been set up by people who are likely to have to deal with new or upgraded pylons. Makes sense.

I have never heard them even talk about urban areas only ever about the country.

And again I have never heard them talk about anyone else apart from themselves they never talk about anyone else.

So factually your correct they have not excluded anyone, As they have not talked about anyone else but themselves.

Mountainsandh · 09-02-2014 10:31PM

Just like Age Action doesn't tend to talk about abused children, and Barnardos doesn't tend to talk about about pensioners.

darkpagandeath · 09-02-2014 10:45PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Just like Age Action doesn't tend to talk about abused children, and Barnardos doesn't tend to talk about about pensioners.

Age action targets all age related issues not just one

Barnardos same with children

Anti pylon groups only talk about themselves, If there were health issues surely they should be talking about all pylons not just the ones being put near them. One type of pylon cant be fine and the other a death tower. either all pylons are bad for everyone or there not.

joela · 09-02-2014 11:20PM

Do you think you could be more willfully misunderstanding of the points I've been making?

I don't resent the anti-pylon groups, I actively dislike them for the reasons I and others have stated repeatedly on this thread.

You just miss the point over and over again.

Mountainsandh wrote: »

But again, do these organisations, these people, need to have their hands held and be led to where they will get support ?

It seems to me the resentment here is focused on the fact that anti-pylon campaigners have mobilized themselves and are fighting for their own plight, in other words, they have taken action, while other groups have been less vocal, or are non-existent.

Again there is nothing to stop other groups, be they people already suffering a pylon next to them, or Friends of the Irish Environment, to publicly call out for help and support, and to campaign in the same manner, maybe even to publicly appeal to anti-pylon campaigners to join them and support them.

As a matter of fact joela, a lot of the names you have mentioned seem to actively publicize their activities using media in the same manner as the anti-pylon groups. So what is the issue ? why the resentment ?

When a community group sets up, of course they have their own individual agenda, why else ? some of these people might already be members of the other groups mentioned above, but this issue is an issue specific to their community at this moment in time, it makes sense that they would deal with it in setting up a community group. Would they have had the same impact had they joined the less specific umbrella groups ?

Again CM, have the people who have a pylon next to them already set up a group of any kind ? Are they vocal ? Are they asking for support ?

Do you think anti-pylon groups would tell either type (Environmental groups, people suffering existing pylons groups) to sod off ?

Is it current anti-pylon groups' responsibility to go dig out every person in Ireland who has a pylon next to their house and ask them to join ?

These remarks sound a bit like a child whinging "they won't play with me", while making no attempt to join whatsoever.

Mountainsandh · 10-02-2014 12:11AM

And you guys disingenuously dismiss my point every time too.

People who have pylons next to them have as much freedom to speak out as people who are likely to have pylons near them soon.

People who are currently protesting against pylons are obviously protesting about their own particular situation, but not to the exclusion of anyone who would like to join them, I'm sure.

Do you not realize at all that the people you are talking about would be a massive asset to have on the anti-pylon side ?

Do you not realize that were an urban person to come up and say : "well actually, I've had a pylon over my house a year, and I don't like it at all", they would more than likely be welcomed and supported by anti-pylon protesters ?

That if an entire urban community spoke out and said : "well actually, we hate the pylons near us too, we are worried about our health, they are affecting our quality of life, and spoiling our area", this would support the anti-pylon side ?

Does that not make sense to you ?

So how do you guys not figure out that well, if that hasn't been spoken about just yet, maybe it's because no one has approached them about it, rather than anti-pylon community groups actively dismissing urban dwellers' plight.

I think I have posted a quote and link on this thread before, but to give you an example, the French RTE (Energy transmission company) has not only committed to stop installing aerial lines, but also to replacing current aerial lines with underground in the future.

They have already started, and in fact are doing better than expected.
http://www.rte-france.com/fr/nos-activites/notre-reseau/les-ouvrages-et-leur-fonction/les-lignes-souterraines-et-la-mise-en-souterrain

So that people who have existing pylons near them might complain and make a stand for themselves is not something completely nonsensical, it is more the kind of pressure which might achieve a change in policy for everyone.

But according to you guys, it's not up to them (urban dwellers, people already afflicted with pylons) to speak out, but it should be the people who just recently got organized into community groups, and put all that effort to highlight their discontent about something that is about to happen, not something that has been there for years.

I strongly disagree.

If you have had a pylon beside you for the past 10, 20, or more years, and haven't spoken out about it, then just get going, you have a chance to join a crowd that are vocal about this. You will more than likely be supported and welcomed.

Mountainsandh · 10-02-2014 12:45AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Age action targets all age related issues not just one

Barnardos same with children

Anti pylon groups only talk about themselves, If there were health issues surely they should be talking about all pylons not just the ones being put near them. One type of pylon cant be fine and the other a death tower. either all pylons are bad for everyone or there not.

Age Action focus on older people's concerns.
Barnardos focus on younger people's concerns.

Anti-pylon groups are focusing on Eirgrid's future plans.

Capt'n Midnight · 10-02-2014 12:53AM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

If you have had a pylon beside you for the past 10, 20, or more years, and haven't spoken out about it,

Then they probably aren't a real problem.

darkpagandeath · 10-02-2014 12:56AM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Age Action focus on older people's concerns.
Barnardos focus on younger people's concerns.

Anti-pylon groups are focusing on Eirgrid's future plans.

To provide energy security for the foreseeable future ? Or are we going back to "its for wind farms to export"

Birdnuts · 10-02-2014 01:44AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

? Or are we going back to "its for wind farms to export"

Still ignoring Eirgrids own justification for the likes of Gridwest I see:rolleyes:.

Capt'n Midnight · 10-02-2014 01:45AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

To provide energy security for the foreseeable future ? Or are we going back to "its for wind farms to export"

It's been mostly FUD so for so no prizes for guessing.

Just a reminder that less than 1/3rd of the work in Grid25 involves new lines.
http://www.eirgridprojects.com/grid25/what-is-grid25/

It involves extensive work throughout the country which includes building 800km of new power lines and upgrading 2,000 km of existing lines which will double the size of today’s electricity Grid.

Mountainsandh · 10-02-2014 09:08AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

It's been mostly FUD so for so no prizes for guessing.

Just a reminder that less than 1/3rd of the work in Grid25 involves new lines.
http://www.eirgridprojects.com/grid25/what-is-grid25/

Upgrades needed for capacity to deal with exportable energy need not be new lines only ?

Again we have not been told clearly one way or the other what proportion of this upgrade is needed for Irish needs only, and what proportion to equip Ireland to export.

So yes, some confusion here that will remain, for as long as this is not cleared.

It's like a 2 adults 2 kids family being told to purchase a 7 seater Renault Espace, to cope with driving around the neighbours' kids to school.
Would the 4 people family do as well with a 5 seater ?

To provide energy security for the foreseeable future ? Or are we going back to "its for wind farms to export"

A little lapse of time is not going to erase a very valid concern. It's not because this hasn't been mentioned in a few days that it's not valid any more. Things are not clear, they are still not clear.
We are a 4 people family about to purchase a 7 seater when there is no apparent justification for it.

Then they probably aren't a real problem.

Absolutely. So there may be a majority of people who have pylons on their land/near them who don't have a problem with it. What would be the rationale for anti-pylon groups to arbitrarily "speak" for these people ?

darkpagandeath · 10-02-2014 02:59PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Absolutely. So there may be a majority of people who have pylons on their land/near them who don't have a problem with it. What would be the rationale for anti-pylon groups to arbitrarily "speak" for these people ?

So your admitting there are no Health risks then ? And what for example hypothetically if Eirgrid turned around and said the upgrade is to accommodate some more coal/gas/oil power stations to be brought online in the future to cope with increased demand ? that would be the end of the protest right ? I think we all know the answer to that ......

Mountainsandh · 10-02-2014 03:57PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So your admitting there are no Health risks then ? And what for example hypothetically if Eirgrid turned around and said the upgrade is to accommodate some more coal/gas/oil power stations to be brought online in the future to cope with increased demand ? that would be the end of the protest right ? I think we all know the answer to that ......

Showing how little you actually take heed of the contents of my posts here, I have stated quite clearly several times that I'm not overly worried about health concerns.
I would tend to be cautious, and if a pylon was to be located near me, would ask for the appropriate safe distances to be observed, but I am not basing my arguments here on health concerns.

There has been one recent review so far which seems to be positive, hopefully the WHO will reinforce that (although I have not read the EU study yet, I like to make my own opinions on things so that's on the to-do list).

As regards the second part of your post, it makes little sense.
I'm guessing you are suggesting that I'm fiercely anti-windmills, and thus I would refuse any kind of energy produced by windmills.

That's not the case, and if you'd like to look at the Midland's wind farms thread, you will see that once again, my issue is with scale and how intrusive the infrastructure is on the landscape (mainly visual impact, for me).

So to answer your question, if Eirgrid proposed an upgrade to cope with future increased demand for Ireland's needs, the source of the energy would not really be relevant to this particular discussion. I would of course agree that an upgrade is needed, and double check that indeed routes and infrastructure options are chosen wisely, to the least inconvenience of all.

I wholeheartedly understand and support the fact that we need to switch to renewable energy, I do not think though, that wind turbines are the one and only option.
I think they are the quick and easy option, and people are safely indulging in a one for all grab for wind farms, since there's a few bobs to be made in it, and they can claim the high moral ground that it's all for the good of the country. And I think that approach is wrong, and simply does not make sense.

There are plenty of young engineers in Ireland capable (and probably already) of coming up with great new ideas to improve renewable energy projects' productivity and feasibility. Some of these projects likely to be much more suited to the size of Ireland.
Look at the young crowd coming up with great improvements for electric car batteries durability.

But all the money making schemes ( and again the Gridlink illustrates that via the support for wind farms for export) are shifting the perspective.
It's not really about what's good for the country and the future, it's about how renewables can be used to save money and make money as quick and as easily as possible.

darkpagandeath · 10-02-2014 04:47PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Showing how little you actually take heed of the contents of my posts here, I have stated quite clearly several times that I'm not overly worried about health concerns.
I would tend to be cautious, and if a pylon was to be located near me, would ask for the appropriate safe distances to be observed, but I am not basing my arguments here on health concerns.

There has been one recent review so far which seems to be positive, hopefully the WHO will reinforce that (although I have not read the EU study yet, I like to make my own opinions on things so that's on the to-do list).

As regards the second part of your post, it makes little sense.
I'm guessing you are suggesting that I'm fiercely anti-windmills, and thus I would refuse any kind of energy produced by windmills.

That's not the case, and if you'd like to look at the Midland's wind farms thread, you will see that once again, my issue is with scale and how intrusive the infrastructure is on the landscape (mainly visual impact, for me).

So to answer your question, if Eirgrid proposed an upgrade to cope with future increased demand for Ireland's needs, the source of the energy would not really be relevant to this particular discussion. I would of course agree that an upgrade is needed, and double check that indeed routes and infrastructure options are chosen wisely, to the least inconvenience of all.

I wholeheartedly understand and support the fact that we need to switch to renewable energy, I do not think though, that wind turbines are the one and only option.
I think they are the quick and easy option, and people are safely indulging in a one for all grab for wind farms, since there's a few bobs to be made in it, and they can claim the high moral ground that it's all for the good of the country. And I think that approach is wrong, and simply does not make sense.

There are plenty of young engineers in Ireland capable (and probably already) of coming up with great new ideas to improve renewable energy projects' productivity and feasibility. Some of these projects likely to be much more suited to the size of Ireland.
Look at the young crowd coming up with great improvements for electric car batteries durability.

But all the money making schemes ( and again the Gridlink illustrates that via the support for wind farms for export) are shifting the perspective.
It's not really about what's good for the country and the future, it's about how renewables can be used to save money and make money as quick and as easily as possible.

But that's what's being done now by Eirgrid it takes so long in this country to get anything done if they just applied for what is needed now we would never get the upgrade that is needed. Then the same people that protested the upgrade will be shouting about brownouts in there area and how Eirgrid should listen to them as they know better. Its just that everyone on the Anti side now has become an Electrical engineer apparently. Saying they know for a fact the scale is to large for Ireland how would they know ? Maybe just maybe we should let the Utility company who deals with this and has the expertise decide. There are planning laws regulations to follow already. First it was devaluation of property. Then it was scale . Then it was environmental issues. Now the last straw is Health concerns.

And I do pay attention to your posts I was talking in broad terms about Anti Pylon groups

Jester252 · 10-02-2014 04:54PM

Wind is the only viable renewable option for Ireland.

Geothermal?
Would have worked a few 100 million years ago

Solar?
Domestic heating at best

Hydropower?
Reports done one Ireland energy sources suggest if 100% of hydro (not possible) was tapped it would be less than 10% of our overall need

Biomass?
Potential but your leaving fuel against food.

Wind and Wave?
Ireland is in one of the best position in the world for wind and wave power. Why not use our natural resources instead of relying on another country to sell us hers?

Jester252 · 10-02-2014 05:02PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

But that's what's being done now by Eirgrid it takes so long in this country to get anything done if they just applied for what is needed now we would never get the upgrade that is needed. Then the same people that protested the upgrade will be shouting about brownouts in there area and how Eirgrid should listen to them as they know better. Its just that everyone on the Anti side now has become an Electrical engineer apparently. Saying they know for a fact the scale is to large for Ireland how would they know ? Maybe just maybe we should let the Utility company who deals with this and has the expertise decide. There are planning laws regulations to follow already. First it was devaluation of property. Then it was scale . Then it was environmental issues. Now the last straw is Health concerns.

And I do pay attention to your posts I was talking in broad terms about Anti Pylon groups

Anti-pylon/turbine groups suffer from new infrastructure syndrome. Whenever a new infrastructure is planned, people will be against it because of some unproven outlandish claims often perched by someone with no qualification in the field. They will hold onto these claims regardless of any amount of independent research carried out by people qualified in the field that disproves their claims.

Remember when the new Limerick/Cork/Galway to Dublin motorways where going to split rural communities in half?
Remember when mobile phone tower where going to give people who looked at them super cancer?

Mountainsandh · 10-02-2014 05:29PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Saying they know for a fact the scale is to large for Ireland how would they know ? Maybe just maybe we should let the Utility company who deals with this and has the expertise decide. There are planning laws regulations to follow already. First it was devaluation of property. Then it was scale . Then it was environmental issues. Now the last straw is Health concerns.

Ok, that's why my point is simple : let Eirgrid tell us then.

Eirgrid are simply stating that Gridlink and other projects will cater for upgrades and higher renewable energy demands.

So far I have not seen any definitive statement as to how much of an upgrade is needed for Irish needs, precisely.

This is why I'm going on about scale, and about exports.

We simply do not know, we simply have not been told, and are still not told, how much of an upgrade is needed for Ireland. We are told the upgrade is needed for a higher demand from renewables. That is not transparent, that does not justify the scale of this upgrade.

Dpd, if Eirgrid were to state clearly that the Irish demand requires this upgrade, at this scale, and that exports are taken out of the equation, then I would simply have to accept it. The conditions in which it is delivered would still be up for scrutiny, it's nice when every one is least inconvenienced, but you wouldn't see me repeating the same mantra about scale.
I don't need to be an engineer to suppose that if you are not exporting power you need less of an upgrade. Less power to circulate = lesser upgrade.

You know and I know how much trust we can place in Irish led organizations. They don't have the best records as regards transparency, to say the least.

So it is really very simple, they are accountable to all of us, as they have shown with the public consultation process. You are right, we don't know, so we need them to tell us precisely what is needed for Irish needs. But imo, though we are not all engineers, we do deserve better explanations than just "higher energy demands to accommodate the development of renewable energy".

Explain things, this project affects a lot of people, they are entitled to know exactly why it is needed.

I have said it on here before : if I was told clearly that a pylon to be placed at the end of my garden was needed to service Cork city, or people in that area, that there was no alternative, I would find it a lot easier to accept it than if that pylon was intended for a wind developer making a few bobs from selling wind power from the Comeraghs to the UK (or elsewhere).

It's not resentment for the person who's making a few bobs, let them do that by all means, but not to the detriment of many, that's simply having a notion of what is fair and what is not.

Mountainsandh · 10-02-2014 05:33PM

Jester252 wrote: »

Anti-pylon/turbine groups suffer from new infrastructure syndrome. Whenever a new infrastructure is planned, people will be against it because of some unproven outlandish claims often perched by someone with no qualification in the field. They will hold onto these claims regardless of any amount of independent research carried out by people qualified in the field that disproves their claims.

Remember when the new Limerick/Cork/Galway to Dublin motorways where going to split rural communities in half?
Remember when mobile phone tower where going to give people who looked at them super cancer?

I hope you realize your 2 posts give a very ironic outlook on your position.

In your first post, you downright dismiss a number of renewable energy alternatives that have not really been seriously piloted here, on the grounds that ... they won't work, iyo.

In your second post, you are highlighting people's natural weariness, or even fear of new projects.

Birdnuts · 10-02-2014 05:35PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

if Eirgrid turned around and said the upgrade is to accommodate some more coal/gas/oil power stations to be brought online in the future to cope with increased demand ? that would be the end of the protest right ? I think we all know the answer to that ......

They could be accomodated on the existing pylon network more or less since they are a centralized source of reliable power unlike wind which is the polar opposite.

Birdnuts · 10-02-2014 05:36PM

Jester252 wrote: »

Anti-pylon/turbine groups suffer from new infrastructure syndrome. Whenever a new infrastructure is planned, people will be against it because of some unproven outlandish claims often perched by someone with no qualification in the field. They will hold onto these claims regardless of any amount of independent research carried out by people qualified in the field that disproves their claims.

Remember when the new Limerick/Cork/Galway to Dublin motorways where going to split rural communities in half?
Remember when mobile phone tower where going to give people who looked at them super cancer?

And what is your qualification?? Motorways!! - how about apples and oranges??:rolleyes:

Birdnuts · 10-02-2014 05:45PM

Jester252 wrote: »

Anti-pylon/turbine groups suffer from new infrastructure syndrome. Whenever a new infrastructure is planned, people will be against it because of some unproven outlandish claims often perched by someone with no qualification in the field. They will hold onto these claims regardless of any amount of independent research carried out by people qualified in the field that disproves their claims.

Remember when the new Limerick/Cork/Galway to Dublin motorways where going to split rural communities in half?
Remember when mobile phone tower where going to give people who looked at them super cancer?

People have legtimate concerns on many fronts as regards these multi billion euro pylon proposals given that they appear to benefit wind developers as opposed to energy users. Alarm bells are ringing all over Europe about the cost and unreliablity of wind power which is why the EU is looking at its renewable targets again. Spain is the latest country to cut subsidies to wind on the back of escalating costs. Ireland already has the 4th highest energy bills in the EU and we don't need to move further up the table on the back of such white elephant projects that will impact all our power bills. Add to that property devaluation and tourism concerns as expoused by the likes of Bord Failte means that these proposals are rightly under fire from many quarters

darkpagandeath · 10-02-2014 05:46PM

Birdnuts wrote: »

They could be accomodated on the existing pylon network more or less since they are a centralized source of reliable power unlike wind which is the polar opposite.

Has it not been mentioned again and again it cant be accommodated on existing pylons as there already upgraded to max capacity. Or do people think they put in new networks every 20 years instead of constantly upgrading them when new technology becomes available and is cost effective.

Pylons

Comments