Pylons

Mountainsandh · 08-03-2014 03:13AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Hmm cant see any information on were this poll was taken or done. If it was online and Anti pylon/wind farm got hold of it I’m sure the information to sign no would have spread around fairly quick to these groups. Most normal people would not go out of their way to sign something like that. So If these wind farms have been shelved why are the Pylons still being built ? Maybe as people have said here they were for other reasons than running those supposed wind farms.

s.

I am very much hoping that we will soon hear of a downscaling. Not a shelving of the upgrade, since I believe the need is genuine, but finally, a more proportionate one.

That they should have announced this the same day was not very likely !

darkpagandeath · 09-03-2014 04:55PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I am very much hoping that we will soon hear of a downscaling. Not a shelving of the upgrade, since I believe the need is genuine, but finally, a more proportionate one.

That they should have announced this the same day was not very likely !

And if the current scale is needed ? As I have not heard any convincing arguments about windfarms being the reason for this upgrade. Some maybe built, Some were in planning stages, other the deal fell through.

Mountainsandh · 09-03-2014 05:58PM

If the scale is needed, then with some partial under grounding in more sensitive areas, it should go ahead.

Again, the wording of everything that's public as regards to the Gridlink project is vague.

It does state clearly that the scheme is necessary to accommodate a larger input from wind.

It does not state clearly what part of that larger amount of wind energy can be attributed to potential exports, ie, how much of the scheme upgrade was needed to transmit energy from wind farms to an export link, in the South East in particular.

darkpagandeath, I have made it clear for my part, that if the balance is fair, and if the scale of the upgrade is justified, then there wouldn't be an issue, other than under-grounding in more sensitive (tourism, cultural, ...) areas, and reasonable distances from homes, schools, etc... of course.

"ambitious" and "exceed" are 2 words that come up too often in ministerial/official statements imo, they show that priorities have not been right for everyone, hopefully the rest of the population have made their case to the extent that some changes will be made.

Greensleeves · 09-03-2014 07:21PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

And if the current scale is needed ? As I have not heard any convincing arguments about windfarms being the reason for this upgrade. Some maybe built, Some were in planning stages, other the deal fell through.

From page 6 of Grid25factsheets.pdf

Wind Energy & the Transmission System

Developing the Transmission System

Meeting Ireland’s 2020 renewable electricity targets and accommodating forecasted growth in demand will put added pressure on the existing transmission system. In addition, many of the locations with the best renewable resources are in areas where the electricity transmission network is less developed. Significant reinforcement and expansion of the transmission system is required if these indigenous natural resources in these areas are to reach homes and industry. Grid25 is EirGrid’s programme to develop the transmission system to the year 2025, which involves utilising the existing transmission system by maximising the capacity of the existing network by utilising new technology and where necessary build new lines.

http://www.eirgridprojects.com/media/Grid25FactSheets.pdf;

darkpagandeath · 10-03-2014 11:05AM

Greensleeves wrote: »

From page 6 of Grid25factsheets.pdf

Wind Energy & the Transmission System

Developing the Transmission System

Meeting Ireland’s 2020 renewable electricity targets and accommodating forecasted growth in demand will put added pressure on the existing transmission system. In addition, many of the locations with the best renewable resources are in areas where the electricity transmission network is less developed. Significant reinforcement and expansion of the transmission system is required if these indigenous natural resources in these areas are to reach homes and industry. Grid25 is EirGrid’s programme to develop the transmission system to the year 2025, which involves utilising the existing transmission system by maximising the capacity of the existing network by utilising new technology and where necessary build new lines.

http://www.eirgridprojects.com/media/Grid25FactSheets.pdf;

That's to meet EU targets we have gone over this there is little choice in meeting them. Most of us have acknowledged some windfarm construction many times. But the massive windfarms "is the only reason" argument to export is/was still in planning or shelved. And also not the only reason for the upgrade.

Greensleeves · 10-03-2014 01:35PM

Well we all seem to be in agreement then that some of Grid 25 is about wind energy. What some of us would like to know is how much of the upgrade is for domestic supply and how much to facilitate wind energy export. The UK export plan may have stalled but EirGrid are also in negotiations with France about an undersea connector.

Ireland & France Move Towards Power Link

EirGrid and its French counterpart RTE (Réseau de Transport d’Électricité) have signed a protocol agreement to carry out a feasibility study on an interconnecting electric cable between Ireland and France.

The proposed submarine umbilical cord between Ireland and France would link the south coast of Ireland with the north-west of France thanks to an underwater cable of about 600km long. This part of France has had its share of power supply problems in the past and Ireland is expected to produce more electricity than it needs in the coming years as a result of investment in wind power generation.

RTE vice-president Pierre Bornard expressed delight at the signature of the protocol, saying that “The construction of this interconnecting cable would allow Irish wind power production to soar and join with the continental grid, which would facilitate the integration of renewable energies into the European electricity system. It would also improve the supply quality of the North-West of France.”

http://www.tootlafrance.ie/news/ireland-france-move-towards-power-link

Capt'n Midnight · 10-03-2014 06:57PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

Well we all seem to be in agreement then that some of Grid 25 is about wind energy. What some of us would like to know is how much of the upgrade is for domestic supply and how much to facilitate wind energy export.

There's a road that goes from Dublin to Cork. Is it used for travel to Cork , is it use for travel to Dublin or is it used for both and travel between all the points in between ?

The whole point of a grid is flexibility.

At present we are limited in how much wind power we can use. Last month we got 23% of our electricity from wind. Enough to reduce the price of electricity and depress the price of gas. Everyone wins. \o/

With grid improvements and a lot of engineering we could accommodate more wind locally as well as import/export it. It would be a very long time before the bulk of electricity on an interconnector would be for export.

Ireland & France Move Towards Power Link

Just a reminder that they are talking about 700MW when the reality on the ground is that grid upgrades are needed because existing network constraints limit power transmission in the Cork area to 800MW. Or in other terms the planned interconnector is a bit less than 7% of the dispatchable capacity on the island or about the same size as the scaled back London Array wind farm.

KyussBishop · 13-03-2014 03:56PM

This is pretty interesting:
"Powerlines disturb animal habitats by appearing as disturbing flashes of UV light invisible to the human eye"
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/powerlines-disturb-animal-habitats-by-appearing-as-disturbing-flashes-of-uv-light-invisible-to-the-human-eye-9187631.html

So, this is what some animals see from pylons and such:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bafB7QwVw6I

darkpagandeath · 13-03-2014 04:51PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

This is pretty interesting:
"Powerlines disturb animal habitats by appearing as disturbing flashes of UV light invisible to the human eye"
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/powerlines-disturb-animal-habitats-by-appearing-as-disturbing-flashes-of-uv-light-invisible-to-the-human-eye-9187631.html

So, this is what some animals see from pylons and such:

Do chemtrails and fluoride bother them to. Birds and so on seem quite happy to warm up on the lines. Do animals get confused when running over ley lines too ? But in all seriousness no just no more pseudoscience nonsense.

KyussBishop · 13-03-2014 05:30PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Do chemtrails and fluoride bother them to. Birds and so on seem quite happy to warm up on the lines. Do animals get confused when running over ley lines too ? But in all seriousness no just no more pseudoscience nonsense.

Uhm, this is pretty scientifically conclusive - you have a major UK newspaper with an article on it there, and here is the BBC:

Animals 'scared' by bursts of light from power cables

Animals around the world could be scared away from power cables because these give off UV flashes invisible to humans, scientists have said.

Several species' vision was studied by an international team to identify this ultra-violet (UV) sensitivity.

The findings, published in the journal Conservation Biology, claimed habitats and migration could be disrupted.

The flashes, or corona, occur when charge builds up in a cable and is released into the air.

The international team, including scientists from University College London and the Arctic University of Norway, measured the spectrum of light emitted by these bursts of charge.

They worked out that although the light was invisible to us, it contained wavelengths seen by many other mammals.

"Most mammals will let some [UV light] into their eye," explained UCL vision expert Prof Glen Jeffery, one of the lead researchers in this project.

"We're weird - us and monkeys - because we don't see UV. Most animals do."
...

http://www.bbc.com/news/26548483

Mountainsandh · 13-03-2014 07:58PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Do chemtrails and fluoride bother them to. Birds and so on seem quite happy to warm up on the lines. Do animals get confused when running over ley lines too ? But in all seriousness no just no more pseudoscience nonsense.

Just because something outlines a potential problem with pylons or turbines does not mean it is pseudo science. For my part I tend to read about the issue from a few sources before I make my mind up.

darkpagandeath · 13-03-2014 08:53PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Just because something outlines a potential problem with pylons or turbines does not mean it is pseudo science. For my part I tend to read about the issue from a few sources before I make my mind up.

They must have a terrible problem dealing with the sun then so .... I have a better explanation. Man made structures are associated with man has their sent on them/around wild animals steer clear of man. None natural structures animals tend to steer clear of. Lets use the most simple explanation instead of the need to invent one.

Mountainsandh · 13-03-2014 11:17PM

You haven't read it so.

As I said, I tend to read and learn before passing judgement, but each to their own.

darkpagandeath · 13-03-2014 11:35PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

You haven't read it so.

As I said, I tend to read and learn before passing judgement, but each to their own.

UV flashes.... Why did you think i mentioned the SUN any number of reasons why migration patterns routes change. The last thing i would be blaming is UV flashes. Maybe human encroachment into an area forcing the heard to change route. Climate change would change migration routes also. I find it more of a coincidence flashing pylons apparently causing this. Putting pylons far away from human settlements to appease people complain about view/health. Guess were the pylons end up. Far out in the wilds were animals have their territory's. Have already given reasons why they would not go near pylons. Yet instead of looking for a simple explanation they have invented a new anti pylon agenda to bash pylons with. Staying away from pylons out in the tundra i would rather go with wind causing vibration or animals just wanting to stay away from unnatural structures high above the surrounding flat landscape. If it sounds made-up it generally is. But most people will go ahead and believe this as they have a pylon agenda in the first place.

It even says in the article "Forest animals will not cross clear-cuts,"

Yet here we are inventing flashing pylons...... If they don't like flashing lights they better not have territory were the aurora borealis happens...

KyussBishop · 14-03-2014 12:40AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

UV flashes.... Why did you think i mentioned the SUN any number of reasons why migration patterns routes change. The last thing i would be blaming is UV flashes. Maybe human encroachment into an area forcing the heard to change rout. Climate change would change migration routes also. I find it more of a coincidence flashing pylons apparently causing this. Putting pylons far away from human settlements to appease people complain about view/health. Guess were the pylons end up. Far out in the wilds were animals have their territory's. Have already given reasons why they would not go near pylons. Yet instead of looking for a simple explanation they have invented a new anti pylon agenda to bash pylons with. Staying away from pylons out in the tundra i would rather go with wind causing vibration or animals just wanting to stay away from unnatural structures high above the surrounding flat landscape. If it sounds made-up it generally is. But most people will go ahead and believe this as they have a pylon agenda in the first place.

It even says in the article "Forest animals will not cross clear-cuts,"

Yet here we are inventing flashing pylons...... If they don't like flashing lights they better not have territory were the aurora borealis happens...

Really, what?....

These scientists don't have an 'agenda' - they made a new scientific discovery, and presented the world with a new and interesting fact; whether or not someone can take this fact, and then use it to pursue an agenda, doesn't disqualify it as a fact.

If you want to claim that the scientists are just making this up out of nowhere, you'll need to prove that; their claim has pretty good backing.

darkpagandeath · 14-03-2014 04:17AM

KyussBishop wrote: »

Really, what?....

These scientists don't have an 'agenda' - they made a new scientific discovery, and presented the world with a new and interesting fact; whether or not someone can take this fact, and then use it to pursue an agenda, doesn't disqualify it as a fact.

If you want to claim that the scientists are just making this up out of nowhere, you'll need to prove that; their claim has pretty good backing.

If they can see power lines they can see aurora borealis yet that has not stopped them migrating. What has changed .. Mans incursion to there territory. I can pretty much guarantee mans incursion is the problem not random UV from power lines

Greensleeves · 14-03-2014 07:07PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

If they can see power lines they can see aurora borealis yet that has not stopped them migrating. What has changed .. Mans incursion to there territory. I can pretty much guarantee mans incursion is the problem not random UV from power lines

Which peer-reviewed science journal has this research/proof of yours been published in?

You should really write to the journal of Conservation Biology and tell them that the article they published is nonsense; they will probably be very interested in your work. While you are at it you could contact the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council and tell them not to be funding such research when you obviously are the most eminent expert in the field. They sound like a right shower of charlatans.

http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/news/health/2014/140312-pr-light-power-cables-seen-by-animals.aspx

darkpagandeath · 14-03-2014 07:35PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

Which peer-reviewed science journal has this research/proof of yours been published in?

You should really write to the journal of Conservation Biology and tell them that the article they published is nonsense; they will probably be very interested in your work. While you are at it you could contact the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council and tell them not to be funding such research when you obviously are the most eminent expert in the field. They sound like a right shower of charlatans.

http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/news/health/2014/140312-pr-light-power-cables-seen-by-animals.aspx

From recent links

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/powerlines-disturb-animal-habitats-by-appearing-as-disturbing-flashes-of-uv-light-invisible-to-the-human-eye-9187631.html

http://www.bbc.com/news/26548483

First article second line “Which could explain why many species avoid electricity pylons”

Second article “Could be scared away from power cables”

Web link BBSRC “Animals may avoid high voltage power cables because of flashing UV light that is undetectable to humans, scientists say”

None of them say has been proven. All theory and conjecture. Easy experiment to perform go out to the tundra setup a load of UV lights. See what happens. Or is it just easier to invent a theory and not test it out. And again side stepping aurora borealis. That gives off UV light and is were the reindeer are. They have no issue with flashing lights in the sky. Birds roost on power lines to keep warm also. So again I'm going with Man made structures and maybe wind making noise over power lines causing an issue. And not flashing pylons.

Mountainsandh · 15-03-2014 01:23AM

Well then off you go explore the tundra to affirm your "facts".

I don't know, maybe find a human made cabin, possibly a bridge, a track, that will confirm your opinion.

These people were there, and conducted the research.

You are just speculating from a great distance, without having put in the ground work. They have, and their preliminary results seem to be taken seriously by Biology expert organisations.

Ironically your quotes with the conditional coulds and mays are reaffirming that these scientists are indeed trustworthy, reserving judgement until further study has been conducted possibly.

I tend to trust the judgement of such scientists more than experts who would jump to conclusions.

It is possible that they are right. That these potential issues are investigated is fair and advisable for further infrastructure development imo.

darkpagandeath · 15-03-2014 02:28AM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Well then off you go explore the tundra to affirm your "facts".

I don't know, maybe find a human made cabin, possibly a bridge, a track, that will confirm your opinion.

These people were there, and conducted the research.

You are just speculating from a great distance, without having put in the ground work. They have, and their preliminary results seem to be taken seriously by Biology expert organisations.

Ironically your quotes with the conditional coulds and mays are reaffirming that these scientists are indeed trustworthy, reserving judgement until further study has been conducted possibly.

I tend to trust the judgement of such scientists more than experts who would jump to conclusions.

It is possible that they are right. That these potential issues are investigated is fair and advisable for further infrastructure development imo.

So with that outlook why are there sill people saying pylons cause health problems. You must at least agree they don't as all the studies and the latest EU paper.

Well we will have to agree to disagree then. On flashing pylons causing reindeer to changer their migration routes. Seem odd that flashing lights in the sky don’t bother them.

Mountainsandh · 15-03-2014 02:38AM

Remember please that I have stated before I am on the fence as regards possible health effects of pylons on humans.
I don't know, one way or the other.

Just like the WHO, who are not 100% sure.

darkpagandeath · 15-03-2014 03:01AM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Remember please that I have stated before I am on the fence as regards possible health effects of pylons on humans.
I don't know, one way or the other.

Just like the WHO, who are not 100% sure.

So loads of papers written by reputable scientists about health you wont believe.

But 1 paper written by one group you put stock in. Don't you find that a little contradictory.

Mountainsandh · 15-03-2014 09:55AM

Can you please desist with the straw men.

I have just repeated clearly that I am on the fence about this.

It's tiresome.

Greensleeves · 15-03-2014 11:58AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

None of them say has been proven. All theory and conjecture.

Indeed. So why are you getting so het up about it and making a fool of yourself by calling it pseudo science? Scientists posit theories, other scientists test these theories and confirm or refute the findings.

You on the other hand can "pretty much guarantee mans incursion is the problem not random UV from power lines".

Easy experiment to perform go out to the tundra setup a load of UV lights. See what happens. Or is it just easier to invent a theory and not test it out. And again side stepping aurora borealis. That gives off UV light and is were the reindeer are. They have no issue with flashing lights in the sky. Birds roost on power lines to keep warm also.

So have you tested your theory out then?

So again I'm going with Man made structures and maybe wind making noise over power lines causing an issue. And not flashing pylons.

Well since you have proof you should really contact the scientists behind this and tell them that they are wrong. BTW what are your scientific qualifications?

However a BBSRC-funded team of researchers from University College London (UCL), Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, UIT The Arctic University of Norway and the University of Oslo in Norway, believes that UV light emitted from power cables is a cause.

darkpagandeath · 15-03-2014 06:19PM

Greensleeves wrote: »

Indeed. So why are you getting so het up about it and making a fool of yourself by calling it pseudo science? Scientists posit theories, other scientists test these theories and confirm or refute the findings.

You on the other hand can "pretty much guarantee mans incursion is the problem not random UV from power lines".

So have you tested your theory out then?

Well since you have proof you should really contact the scientists behind this and tell them that they are wrong. BTW what are your scientific qualifications?

However a BBSRC-funded team of researchers from University College London (UCL), Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, UIT The Arctic University of Norway and the University of Oslo in Norway, believes that UV light emitted from power cables is a cause.

I don't know maybe as the sun gives off massive amounts of UV and they are fine with that yet. Tiny flashing lights off pylons puts the fear of death into them. Same with the northern lights Reindeer have no issue with them. It does not stack up logically. So if they are well used to UV ? what is new to their territory. Well it’s not flashing UV they have seen that before it’s been around for millions of years. It’s man made structures that's new. Man made structures in places that can be very windy with wires tight like guitar strings. Wind passing over them = noise. Or just the structures themselves being the issue. Simplest explanation is usually the correct one. I have read a few articles on this now and it says cow's can see UV see below link. So Forgive me if people who go from 1 scientific paper that basically says animals can see UV. Then another scientist jumping immediately to Reindeer affected by pylons UV conclusion without any experimentation i can find. I will reserve judgement as there are simpler explanations. And i for one don't think that follows the standard scientific method.

http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/01/30/02/1300256_e7642476.jpg

But i think we are going a little off topic

Mountainsandh · 15-03-2014 10:07PM

Do the cows in your pic have an option to move to another field ? Do they have a way to tell the farmer ? It would be interesting to study milk yield and general health of these cows vs cows that do not have to graze under pylons.
Nothing might come of it, which would be great, but something might too.

dpd did you watch the video accompanying the first article ? The flashes are represented, and very unpleasant to watch. It's not a fluid or pretty constant light like the sun, or the auroras ... it's a pulsating erratic flashing, that would personally drive me mental if I could see it.

Bruthal · 15-03-2014 11:31PM

househero wrote: »

Your view is NOT popular.

Most people want a future, not a view. Ask your younger relatives what they value most. You may be surprised that your passion is not shared with the wider population. Selfish attitudes are rarely entertained on a national scale.

If there was a referendum on it, do you think the majority of people would vote for, or against it?

Its easy to claim you are not selfish etc, when not affected yourself. If a dump was to be placed outside your front door, I bet your first thoughts would be selfish ones.

darkpagandeath · 16-03-2014 03:19AM

Bruthal wrote: »

Its easy to claim you are not selfish etc, when not affected yourself. If a dump was to be placed outside your front door, I bet your first thoughts would be selfish ones.

Like pylons outside cities ?

SpaceTime · 16-03-2014 03:34AM

Wait until they see what the excavation work would be like for under grounding them!

It's akin to building a metro tunnel for trains. These are not your local 230V / 400V wiring or even 10kV lines, they're major high tension power lines.

At the very least you're talking about digging up a 9-meter wide corridor into a huge trench. It's not too dissimilar to motorway construction!

Sometimes tunnels are required.

These things are usually gas-filled tubes which are about 90cm (35") across!

And you've got to burry up to 6 of them side by side.

If you think overhead lines are going to disrupt our farm, wait until you see what is involved in under grounding HV lines before you consider it! You'd be talking about a 9 to 10 meter wide (about the size of 2 lanes of roadway) dug about 3-6m deep across everything then back filled.

Under grounding small low / medium voltage lines is very simple stuff, but this is in a different league entirely.

I can see a lot of landowners preferring pylons !!

http://electrical-engineering-portal.com/gas-insulated-transmission-line-gil

Curly Judge · 16-03-2014 10:42AM

SpaceTime wrote: »

Wait until they see what the excavation work would be like for under grounding them!

It's akin to building a metro tunnel for trains. These are not your local 230V / 400V wiring or even 10kV lines, they're major high tension power lines.

At the very least you're talking about digging up a 9-meter wide corridor into a huge trench. It's not too dissimilar to motorway construction!

Sometimes tunnels are required.

These things are usually gas-filled tubes which are about 90cm (35") across!

And you've got to burry up to 6 of them side by side.

If you think overhead lines are going to disrupt our farm, wait until you see what is involved in under grounding HV lines before you consider it! You'd be talking about a 9 to 10 meter wide (about the size of 2 lanes of roadway) dug about 3-6m deep across everything then back filled.

Under grounding small low / medium voltage lines is very simple stuff, but this is in a different league entirely.

I can see a lot of landowners preferring pylons !!

http://electrical-engineering-portal.com/gas-insulated-transmission-line-gil

Agreed!
Undergrounding [except in limited areas, for very specific reasons] is not an option.

Pylons

Comments