New Government Report spells disaster for on-shore Wind Energy

whatstherush wrote: »

why would they produce a doctored wind atlas, with less wind?

An excellent question, it goes precisely to the heart of the matter. Thank you for putting it so succinctly.

Prior to July 4th, 2013 the Irish Energy Centre scientific studies - including a 4 year on site study at Oweninny, the 7 year UK DTI capacity factor figures for the North, the mean wind figures for Oweninny and the former SEAI wind atlas all agree and point to excellent electricity production at Oweninny/Cluddaun.

On that date, Oweninny Power Limited submitted a planning application under the Strategic Infrastructure Act for a colossal wind farm. It contained two great surprises for me:

The EIA contains a capacity factor, a quantity I have never previously encountered in any planning application for a wind farm here. It quantifies expected lifetime yield for the project. What is it doing there? Capacity factor information is not a requirement of the planning process. Coilte do not mention capacity factor in their application. Large companies rarely reveal this kind of sensitive financial information.

The capacity factor it contains, 33%, is used in various calculation, e.g. carbon emissions, that are a requirement of the planning process. That 33% figure flies in the face of very considerable high quality scientific evidence. Why is it so much lower than the best evidence says it should be?

In granting a planning permission, An Bord Pleanála certifies the information in the application. In the case of OPL, that includes the capacity factor information. In doing that, the Bord puts a value on OPL, certified by the Irish State. The total project cost estimate is published, subject to public tender, as are the borrowing costs for the companies involved. OPL can get an investment bank to put a value on itself, and it can be sold overnight, in whole or in part, without any democratic oversight.

If you convince the Bord to certify a capacity factor much lower that the true figure, the valuation will fall very considerably. In a sense, electricity from wind is like sms messaging, both cost nothing to make. If you conceal a massive chunk of the annual cash flow, all of it profit, the value plummets. The project can be sold, apparently at fair value and our natural resources will have been plundered once again in North Mayo.

The Dept of Energy has responsibility for ESB, BnM, and SEAI. As ESB/BnM, including Oweninny project team members, exchanged information with the new wind atlas contractor, I would think the 33% emerged from that exchange. There is no independent scientific evidence in support of it whatsoever and plenty of evidence has emerged in this thread to show that our wind resource has not varied to any great extent over many many years of Met Éireann measurements. Why should the next 40 years be any different?

An Bord Pleanála are due to make a decision tomorrow in respect of Oweninny/Cluddaun.

Paul Thomas Rowland wrote: »

...What about the impact of the new SEAI wind atlas on small rural communities up and down the country?..

First may I say, this thread is not about the merits of developing our wind resources. That is another debate.

What is happening at Oweninny/Cluddaun should be a matter of concern to all of us in this country. It is certainly a matter of very serious concern to the people of North Mayo. It is local communities that suffer when resource development projects go horribly wrong. Rightly, or wrongly, many people believe that the root cause of the Corrib disaster was corruption.

The Dept of Energy and Natural Resources bears the responsibility for that disaster. Have they learned anything in the 20+ years since Corrib began? The Dept is back in North Mayo with another massive resource project, Oweninny. Already, the stench of corruption surrounds it and it is science, lots of robust pre-existing independent scientific studies, that permits us to detect that stench from a considerable distance.

All natural resources, including the air and all forms of potential energy...belong to the State.... Article 10 of our Constitution.

Where the resource is excellent, and very profitable compared to elsewhere, why not share these resources fairly in an open and transparent manner? To my mind, that is part and parcel of sustainable development. We do after all own our resource equally

Sadly, Govt policy for Oweninny is to shovel these fabulous resources into a special purpose vehicle, OPL, with almost zero transparency that can vanish overnight. Where will the wealth go from OPL? To the ESB and BnM, two of the most powerful, wealthy, influential institutions in Ireland? Perhaps it will just vanish overnight, who knows? Who would even notice? This not sustainable development, as I understand it. The consultation exercise conducted by the State was a disinformation campaign carefully designed to pull the wool over our eyes.

All of this happening in a wall of media silence. I invite you to search RTE for information on Oweninny and Cluddaun. You will find the few hits will link, by and large, to the ESB/BnM/Coillte annual reports and the announcement of the oral hearings. Prime Time, their flagship current affairs team, had several shows devoted to wind farm projects without a single mention of Oweninny/Cluddaun, by far the largest proposed wind farm in this country. The Oweninny/Cluddaun applications had been with ABP for many months but not a word about it on RTE. They are, of course, under the thumb of the Dept and enjoy the advertising steam they derive from their semi-state stable mates.

If you search the Irish Times, Examiner, local Mayo papers there is some information but nothing relating to value and profitability - no valuation.

The wind atlas was primarily intended as an information tool for Local Authorities in identifying areas suitable for renewable energy development within County Development Plans. Local Authorities have subsequently utilised the SEAI wind atlas as a basis for developing county wind energy strategies. - Minister Alex White.

Some Counties, Mayo for example, have included Community Benefit Contributions in their County Development Plans under Section 109 of the Local Government Act 2001. In the case of Mayo, the amount is €10,000/MW. The amount offerred by ESB/BnM was €1,000/MW. The UK require £5,000/MW, at least.

The new wind atlas will have a chilling effect on perfectly legitimate Community Benefit entitlements across the country, robbing those communities of billions of euro over the next 40 years. Projects appear far less profitable if you use the use it as your reference point for yield. This has, of course, already happened as the new wind atlas is in place for a few months now. This has even done at a stroke by the state without a mention anywhere.