Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Energy infrastructure

Options
1…1011131516…173

Comments

  • Options
    #362
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,265 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    riddlinrussell wrote: »
    The only thing really keeping Non-Renewables in the game at all at this stage is lack of guaranteed base load.
    that and Ramp rates, Ancillary services, spinning reserve. DROP ACE, inertia and so on.


  • Options
    #363
    riddlinrussell
    Registered Users Posts: 978 ✭✭✭riddlinrussell


    ted1 wrote: »
    that and Ramp rates, Ancillary services, spinning reserve. DROP ACE, inertia and so on.

    Most of those fall under 'backup to the main energy generation method', apologies I kind of rolled them all into 'guaranteed base load'


    Subsidies do make sense in certain areas, early on in wind and solar they were vital to get adoption up and encourage the technology to become more efficient, and its paid off.

    Home Heating Efficiency subsidies are another place, absolutely vital to get this done, uptake will be slow without them but the long term benefits for the state are lower energy requirements, fewer people in fuel poverty, reduced risk of fines for failing our energy commitments with the EU, and more people who can afford to spend outside of essentials because they aren't pouring all their money into heating a leaky house.


  • Options
    #364
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    ted1 wrote: »
    If a technology cant stand on its own feet then why should it be subsidised.

    Big companies provide Economies of scale, the state shouldn't be supporting your pet project.

    If you want a ROI I suggest you invest in green fund.

    https://www.bvp.ie/eii-scheme/eii-tax-relief-scheme-fund/

    We were subsidising turf burning for years.


  • Options
    #365
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,265 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    We were subsidising turf burning for years.

    That’s for Energy Security. And it’s been stopped.
    It’s also for mass generation that was dispatched by the TSO and Market Operator. Very different than a farmers pet project being subsided


  • Options
    #366
    tom1ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,036 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    ted1 wrote: »
    what size biofarm?

    what would the bio be?

    could by many reasons why. the first thing to do is to look at the size you want connected.

    My post you quoted was a response to another poster saying esb don’t allow bio farm connections.
    I was asking why.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #367
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    ted1 wrote: »
    That’s for Energy Security. And it’s been stopped.
    It’s also for mass generation that was dispatched by the TSO and Market Operator. Very different than a farmers pet project being subsided
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by richie123 View Post
    That's exactly it without decent subsidies there useless.
    Same with turbines and solar pv..
    The ordinary joe soap is charged through the nose.50 euro a year increase alone in pso levy this year.
    Only big companies can apply for these turbine and pv projects.
    It's one big scam imo.

    If a technology cant stand on its own feet then why should it be subsidised.

    I understood from this that you were heaping solar and turbines into the "shouldn't get subsidies" basket.


  • Options
    #368
    richie123
    Registered Users Posts: 790 ✭✭✭richie123


    riddlinrussell wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that Wind Turbines/Solar still need subsidy? Both are mature and are beating Non-Renewables hand over fist even with Non-Renewables receiving subsidies in many cases. The only thing really keeping Non-Renewables in the game at all at this stage is lack of guaranteed base load.

    The recent auctions for solar were somewhere around 60 70 euro a mw
    The states pays them that money.
    I stand to be corrected on the figures if they're incorrect


  • Options
    #369
    richie123
    Registered Users Posts: 790 ✭✭✭richie123


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    We were subsidising turf burning for years.

    That's true that was wrong also..Shannon bridge upgraded in the early noughties going be closed now.bull****
    The money wasted by this country is criminal
    Millions wasted


  • Options
    #370
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    richie123 wrote: »
    That's true that was wrong also..Shannon bridge upgraded in the early noughties going be closed now.bull****
    The money wasted by this country is criminal
    Millions wasted

    Well if the earlier thread is true providence has struck oil in barryroe so I sense another flight of the earls coming and by earls I mean energy and profit al a shell to sea.


  • Options
    #371
    gjim
    Registered Users Posts: 1,115 ✭✭✭gjim


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    That would be grand if we kept the money and did a Norway but deals will be done and envelopes delivered so the profits will vanish abroad along with the majority of the energy.
    The delivery of envelopes decides Irish energy policy? Isn't there a conspiracy theories forum for this type of nonsense?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #372
    gjim
    Registered Users Posts: 1,115 ✭✭✭gjim


    richie123 wrote: »
    The recent auctions for solar were somewhere around 60 70 euro a mw
    The states pays them that money.
    I stand to be corrected on the figures if they're incorrect
    I presume you mean MWh? So 6 or 7 cent per KWh? That doesn't seem exorbitant? Wholesale rates in Ireland are 14 cent per KWh and domestic rates well over 20c. It's a lot higher than the auction I read about in Dubai a year ago which was under 3c/KWh but that wouldn't be shocking given the differences in climate.


  • Options
    #373
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,465 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Apogee wrote: »
    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/energy-and-resources/oil-could-flow-from-barryroe-within-three-years-1.4423686

    Well if this pans out on the natural gas side, looks like we won't be needing those three LNG import facilities at all and they can be scrapped.

    On the comments about making money from Oil. The days of earning large amounts of money from oil are well over. Oil barrel prices are well down and while they will probably increase slightly post Covid, medium to long term demand is only going down as EV's and renewables continue to pick up.


  • Options
    #374
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    bk wrote: »
    Well if this pans out on the natural gas side, looks like we won't be needing those three LNG import facilities at all and they can be scrapped.

    On the comments about making money from Oil. The days of earning large amounts of money from oil are well over. Oil barrel prices are well down and while they will probably increase slightly post Covid, medium to long term demand is only going down as EV's and renewables continue to pick up.

    I wonder what the cost per barrel out of barryroe is said to be


  • Options
    #375
    richie123
    Registered Users Posts: 790 ✭✭✭richie123


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    I wonder what the cost per barrel out of barryroe is said to be

    Will it make any money at all even with pickup in price over the next year ...


  • Options
    #376
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,700 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    riddlinrussell wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that Wind Turbines/Solar still need subsidy? Both are mature and are beating Non-Renewables hand over fist even with Non-Renewables receiving subsidies in many cases. The only thing really keeping Non-Renewables in the game at all at this stage is lack of guaranteed base load.
    And subsidies, lots of subsidies. Just look up fossil fuel subsidies.




    Nuclear is getting even greater subsidies. Especially when you consider that decommissioning and insurance costs aren't properly covered.

    The cost of spinning reserve is determined by the largest generator that could possible fail. On grids with nuclear power guess who the largest generator is ??

    Hinkley C is getting twice the market rate for baseload. Zero carbon sounds good but you could get similar reduction by replacing coal with gas. Especially old coal stations. And you need something like gas to load balance nuclear. Moneypoint coal used dropped 70% last year.


    Low energy light bulbs have reduced electricity demand by more than nuclear provides. That's where it falls in the grand scheme of things. And because approval and construction time is so long it's % contribution to overall supply is falling over time.


  • Options
    #377
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,700 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    riddlinrussell wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that Wind Turbines/Solar still need subsidy? Both are mature and are beating Non-Renewables hand over fist even with Non-Renewables receiving subsidies in many cases. The only thing really keeping Non-Renewables in the game at all at this stage is lack of guaranteed base load.
    There is no question that if there was cheap long term energy storage then renewables win.


  • Options
    #378
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    There is no question that if there was cheap long term energy storage then renewables win.

    In terms of renewable energy storage solutions, I think over the next decade, as more investment is made, we are going to see co-location of power plants / generator sites with green hydrogen.

    Where its located with power plants, there will likely be turbines to consume the hydrogen directly, so when its night, and the wind is low, there's a third source to dip into.

    California & Texas are already running into issues where the amount of power they are generating can not be consumed so they are looking at ways of consuming it/storing it in an way that doesn't involve batteries. This is one method with the last coal burning plant in California being switched over to 70/30 mix of gas/hydrogen by 2025. The hydrogen will be stored nearby in underground salt caverns.

    Interesting video on it here. Caveat; lots of vested interest/biased speak in it though



    Hydrogen will definitely grow in prominence and importance over the next decade as more industries look to switch away from carbon emitting to zero emissions. For the likes of the shipping industry,


  • Options
    #379
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,700 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Hydrogen will definitely grow in prominence and importance over the next decade as more industries look to switch away from carbon emitting to zero emissions. For the likes of the shipping industry,
    I can't see shipping using Hydrogen. It's a very bulky fuel.

    For thermal engines we rely on hydrogen already. Hydrocarbons are just a very handy way to store hydrogen. There's talk of using Ammonia as a fuel on large vessels.

    The process of making ammonia uses about 1% of global energy consumption so the basics are understood. It's like natural gas except nitrogen instead of carbon. It's easier to store too. It's just a wee bit toxic (as in kill everything within a quarter mile, including grass) . And it's only an inefficient energy store.

    But with renewables the cost of energy tends to zero so efficiency isn't that critical compared to the cost of storing.


  • Options
    #380
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    I can't see shipping using Hydrogen. It's a very bulky fuel.

    Maybe, I guess time will tell. Same as with a lot of this stuff, there's a bunch of trials ongoing.

    But they will not be able to continue using the fuel they are using. Its literally the worst type of crap oil and they are pumping out a billion tonnes of carbon a year. Its simply filthy and they will soon have the decision taken out of their hands I think. They had the opportunity recently to drive the change themselves and ended up setting a farcical goal. So much so that most of the industry complained and said they would set their own internal, higher targets for emission reduction.

    It was also a few days after the EU Parliament voted to include maritime CO2 emissions in the EU carbon market from 2022, following criticism that shipping is the only sector to not face emissions reduction targets. The decision will force shipowners to buy carbon permits to cover emissions during voyages in Europe or international voyages which start or finish at a European port

    However, if it makes sense from an economic POV, the shipping companies will make the change themselves, regardless of any other factors. Their margins are tiny and they do anything to maintain them for example reducing the average speed of all vessels back in 2009 to save on fuel costs and they have kept this since then. This year they are scrapping a lot, and I mean a LOT, of vessels as the price of iron has gone mental.

    Its the same with haulage firms. The fuel type will be driven by margins.

    The only exception to this is where legislation forces a change and I foresee the EU playing an even greater role in forcing the shipping industry to improve.


  • Options
    #381
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,428 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    What happens to the heavy distilate residues if they're not used for fuel for ships , are they likely to end up being burnt elsewhere ? I'm guessing they're pretty toxic so can't be just stored somewhere ...

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #382
    salonfire
    Registered Users Posts: 3,078 ✭✭✭salonfire


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    That would be grand if we kept the money and did a Norway but deals will be done and envelopes delivered so the profits will vanish abroad along with the majority of the energy.

    Would you prefer if the Irish Government carried the losses for the costs of exploration? Have a dedicated branch of the civil service out drilling bore holes? Would have to be 9-5 mind with Flextime thrown in


  • Options
    #383
    Apogee
    Registered Users Posts: 3,770 ✭✭✭Apogee


    Apogee wrote: »
    Missed this back in November about a new 500MW interconnector going for planning.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/energy-and-resources/project-to-connect-electricity-grids-in-ireland-and-wales-submits-plans-1.4079609
    https://www.greenlink.ie/

    Irish Examiner wrote:
    A planning application is to be submitted to An Bord Pleanála this week for permission for the Irish side of a €450m grid-connector with the UK. The project, named Greenlink, is a privately funded interconnector which would see a 190km grid connection placed between the Wexford and Wales coastlines. The interconnector would have a nominal capacity of 500 megawatts, equivalent to powering in the region of 380,000 homes. The planning application will be made under Strategic Infrastructure Development rules meaning it can be made directly to ABP rather than having to first submit to the relevant local authority.


    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40186605.html


  • Options
    #384
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    In terms of renewable energy storage solutions, I think over the next decade, as more investment is made, we are going to see co-location of power plants / generator sites with green hydrogen.

    Where its located with power plants, there will likely be turbines to consume the hydrogen directly, so when its night, and the wind is low, there's a third source to dip into.

    California & Texas are already running into issues where the amount of power they are generating can not be consumed so they are looking at ways of consuming it/storing it in an way that doesn't involve batteries. This is one method with the last coal burning plant in California being switched over to 70/30 mix of gas/hydrogen by 2025. The hydrogen will be stored nearby in underground salt caverns.

    Interesting video on it here. Caveat; lots of vested interest/biased speak in it though



    Hydrogen will definitely grow in prominence and importance over the next decade as more industries look to switch away from carbon emitting to zero emissions. For the likes of the shipping industry,

    There is a trial in Scotland of Hydrogen home heating boilers. I thing there also talk of putting 10 to 20% hydrogen gas into normal gas boilers.


  • Options
    #385
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    There is a trial in Scotland of Hydrogen home heating boilers. I thing there also talk of putting 10 to 20% hydrogen gas into normal gas boilers.

    What do they do with the oxygen?


  • Options
    #386
    tom1ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,036 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Apogee wrote: »
    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40186605.html

    Wonder what sort of impact brexit will have on the interconnectors we have with the uk?
    Kinda makes the Celtic interconnector all the more important.


  • Options
    #387
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,465 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    tom1ie wrote: »
    Wonder what sort of impact brexit will have on the interconnectors we have with the uk?
    Kinda makes the Celtic interconnector all the more important.

    The UK are desperate to stay part of the IEM (Internal Energy Market) as they are a net importer of energy from the EU and would be in serious trouble keeping the lights on without these interconnectors.

    Under a trade deal with the UK, there would be little or no change to ho the interconnectors are operated, they all remain under IEM.

    If there is a hard Brexit, then it becomes more difficult, they can still be used, but energy trading needs to be done outside of the IEM, which would likely drive up energy costs.


  • Options
    #388
    richie123
    Registered Users Posts: 790 ✭✭✭richie123


    Esb warning of future supply shocks and shortages today.
    All we need now is a prolonged cold spell and all the hundreds of millions invested in turbines producing little to nothing will be enlightening.
    Shannon bridge closed today.
    Not 15 years built and it's closed.
    absolute maddness.
    Timeline was too quick should have ran another 5 year at the least.


  • Options
    #389
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,594 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    The problem is they only supply 3% of the power. But your right it is madness shutting them down, i believe lansebourgh is going next week as well. I wonder why they haven't considered converting them to biomass. There was also an amber alert yesterday with 3 power stations having issues and wind generation dropped of a cliff apparently


  • Options
    #390
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    roadmaster wrote: »
    The problem is they only supply 3% of the power. But your right it is madness shutting them down, i believe lansebourgh is going next week as well. I wonder why they haven't considered converting them to biomass

    Where would the biomass come from?

    They would need a lot of it, and it would be uneconomic if it was not local. Think of trucking all that stuff from the ports if it needed importing.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #391
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,594 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    Where would the biomass come from?

    They would need a lot of it, and it would be uneconomic if it was not local. Think of trucking all that stuff from the ports if it needed importing.

    We start growing it and give the farmers a guarantee price so they will commit


Advertisement