Energy prices on the rise again-time for nuclear power?

S

shnaek

Registered User
Messages
599
Board Gais announced Gas prices will go up by 34% in October. That is scary. Combined with an up-to 20% increase in ESB - that will burn a hole in my pocket - and I'm sure plenty other pockets. Why can't we follow Sweeden and reduce our dependance on fossil fuels? If Kyoto kicks in it's going to be mighty expensive to live here.
 
Re: Prices on the rise again

Nuclear. Your only man!
 
Re: Prices on the rise again

I agree that nuclear should remain an option, but would you let any of the muppets currently in charge of this benighted country build one??

d
 
Re: Prices on the rise again

Lets see ..... nuclear is probably the way to go...but would you put in in the hands of the Dublin Port Tunnel designers to come up with it? Or those who sanctioned the e-voting machines to wrtite the software that prevents a meltdown.....

They would probably come up with a great location on where to locate it also ... the Burren perhaps!

what does that do to your confidence level in relation to the government actually being able to carry this off.... if they start talking about it now then we might have one for 2025!

ninsaga
 
Re: Prices on the rise again

Reluctantly - I'm pro Nuclear myself now. Not because of these price rises, but probably since around the time of the start of the Iraq war.
We have got to get out from under OPEC and wean ourselves off oil. It makes sense both politically and economically, and like it or not it is inevitable in the long run.

It does worry me that we live in a country run by muppets like Dick Roche who are actually demanding to know the source of every AMP that flows into the country from abroad - because he won't even BUY nuclear nergy, much less build it!
 
Re: Prices on the rise again

Meccano said:
Reluctantly - I'm pro Nuclear myself now.
Click to expand...
For all the same reasons you mention i find myself leaning that direction too. It's becoming a question of having control over your own energy resources and for an island like ours nuclear power could be a long term solution. The French are now reaping the benefits of the dominance of nuclear power in their own electricity grid.

Meccano said:
It does worry me that we live in a country run by muppets like Dick Roche who are actually demanding to know the source of every AMP that flows into the country from abroad - because he won't even BUY nuclear nergy, much less build it!
Click to expand...
While it may be politically a vote getter to come out with nonsense like this it's economically and practically an impossibility to distinguise between where the electricity came from. There is so little leadership in Irish political life it's depressing; say what you think will get votes and to hell with independent thought about the future of our nation.

While i'm not actually a subscriber to the notion that we're anywhere near Peak Oil problems i do think it's prudent to have a serious discussion about every energy option available now and put in place solutions that can serve the nation in decades ahead.

Wind/wave etc can only supply a portion of the grid due to natural fluctuations and nuclear is a feasible option for the rest.
 
Re: Prices on the rise again

shnaek said:
Why can't we follow Sweden and reduce our dependance on fossil fuels?
Click to expand...

Wish we could; but Swedens got a lot of advantages we don't, in particular the huge hydro potential in that country and they have far more land. Their population density is one third of ours (20/sq.km vs. 60.3/sq.km) which means more empty space for wind turbines, hydro plants, solarcells/solar panals etc.

Personally I am strongly anti Fission Nuclear - however I would willingly accept Fusion Nuclear when it is eventually developed commercially (could be 5 or 50 years away, impossible to tell).

For the moment we have to accept high, and rising energy prices - there is NO short term alternative. IMHO we should:

  • follow a policy of energy conservation (switch off those LED's, replace bulbs with more energy efficent),
  • implement national rail eletricification over the next two decades
  • continue development of windfarms - especially offshore projects like the Arklow bank project
  • switch the entire public bus system to hybrid/biodiesel over the next decade
  • introduce extensive new tax incentives for fuel efficent cars, particularly hybrids and heavily tax SUV's.
  • introduce tax incentives for private buses and taxis to switch to hybrids over the next decade.
  • copy the Portugese solar panal scheme - i.e. all new homes must have a solar panal on their roofs.
  • build more UK/Europe interconnectors and fully support any pan-EU attempts to create a pan-EU grid.
  • investigate the possiblity of replicating the Turlough hill project in several more locations (perhaps Kerry, Donegal, Galway and Wicklow again) to ensure the grid can cope with >50% wind power or even >80% and also to increase efficency of existing oil/gas plants.
  • promote the development of a biodiesel sector, centred around the sugerbeet farmers who are just after being hit hard by the plant closures.
  • investigate the possiblity of creating a national haulage sharing/database database - if a Supervalu truck leaves the distribution center in Kilcock for a supermarket in Mullingar it is simply wasteful that it returns to base completely empty; for example it could go to the Lidl distribution center in Mullingar and bring back a load to Kilcock or Lidl on the way. Obviously firms might not like this - but if it could save them money, squeeze out efficencies then it might seem attractive. (perhaps only sharing/renting truck space to firms not in direct competition? it's just an idea...)
  • build a small tram system (like LUAS) in Cork, Limerick and Galway and introduce local bus services to all urban centers over 20,000 currently unserved by such services.
  • offer companies & individuals tax incentives for employees cycling/walking/using public transport to work
  • encourage higher density housing in urban centers (particularly in Cork, Galway, Waterford & Limerick) to avoid the urban sprawl that chokes Dublins traffic and wastes so much petrol.
  • enforce minimum home insulation regulations and encourage even higher standards.
  • build several small scale wave stations to gain experience with the technology and scale up in ten years.
  • the government should establish a multi million euro fund to invest in alternative energy firms, public transport companies and related businesses. If we are going to develop the expertise to become energy independent, then we should capitalise on this and export the new knowledge and create jobs, new businesses and export earnings from it.
If we want to get to were Sweden will be soon, that's what we need to do (IMHO). That wish list could leave Ireland with 100% energy security, very low prices when compared internationally, the potential to become a significant energy exporter, create a whole new export-based indigenous business sector, and of course reinforce the two key brands we sell abroad - our greeness (for tourism) and our technological expertise (it takes some pretty darn smart brains to implement the above integrated energy system)

Fission nuclear power is just as expensive as most conventional fossil based electricity sources - once all costs are taken into account and grants/tax breaks subtracted. In addition nuclear power has a major safety aspect - it is correctly argued that it is very unlikely that a major accident would occur in a well run modern western reactor - but if one single accident occured ever it could absolutely destroy this country. The risk is far too vast for me personally to accept.

Also, it would be 2025 before this country could reasonable hope to build a nuclear power plant and it would probably be 2035 before we could build enough to power the whole country - that's easily enough time to build sufficent Wind/Solar/Wave capacity to power the whole country. We already have experience with the latter option, so why not pursue it enthusiastically?
 
Re: Prices on the rise again

I think this is important enough to go in Great Financial Debates.

Please don't mention property.

Moved by CCOVICH.
 
Re: Prices on the rise again-time for nuclear power?

Well we're effectively using nuclear power already with the connector between Northern Ireland and Scotland.

The EU have opened up the energy market and energy suppliers now trade with each other. i.e. if it's -10 degrees in Paris and +15 degrees in England, English nukes can sell their surplus energy cheaper as there's less demand.

The ESB can buy French, German, British electricity as they please. Whenever they can't meet demand on their own, they'll get surplus power from wherever it's cheapest.
 
Re: Prices on the rise again-time for nuclear power?

I think CGorman has summed up the issues nicely. I have always been wary of nuclear energy as a means of electricity generation, especially when you consider that America has not built one new facility in 25 years, AFAIK. I read an article on this very subject in National Geographic some time ago. And, as suggested it would be very difficult to have confidence in our government to manage the procurement of such a facility- should it ever become a reality. I think the use of bio fuels is surely an obvious choice for our country- we are (still) an agricultural economy, we rely heavily on road networks for transport and our "traditionaL" approach to farming (overproduction of unwanted foods thanks to EU CAP) is changing rapidly. Agriculture must evolve to changing needs and demands- why not channel our biggest natural resource (farming land) into the production of bio fuels for transport and heating? The introduction of grant incentives for people who opt to switch to sustainable energy sources is admirable but this scheme will not suit everyone. It is simply not feasible for someone living in a house in a suburban housing scheme to switch to a wood pellet boiler- where do you store the bulk fuel in a 10m x 10m typical garden? Questions such as these require the type of "joined up" thinking that our public representatives find so challenging. The up side of all these price hikes (which must impact heavily on inflation?) is that public awareness will be raised- already sustainable energy is a real option for many people; 10-15 years ago this would have been dismissed as a novelty, for the sandal wearing greens only!
 
While I am not anti-nuclear and think it has enormous potential as a future green energy, I am conscious that we have little expertise in this area in Ireland. While the expertise could be imported, someone still needs to manage and run the plants and our track record for managing large-scale engineering projects is iffy at best.

Although it is touted as an "Irish solution to an Irish problem", importing cheap nuclear-generated electricity from the UK is a good option. I understand the building of a 700MW plant is being considered for Derry.

Alternative energy in the form of wind-power has long been touted for Ireland but frankly the building of these windmills strikes me as window dressing. The power output is low relative to the environmental noise and sight pollution involved in their construction. Solar power, bio-fuels and tidal power offer much better opportunities.

The Mallow and Carlow sugar factory plants would have been ideal for conversion to bio-fuel generation. Farmers could also have kept growing sugar beet specifically for this purpose. Unfortunately, as with many things in this country, the ridiculous price of property has got in the way and the sites will prove far more valuable when converted into blocks of apartments.
 
room305 said:
I understand the building of a 700MW plant is being considered for Derry.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is. There was some politician from Derry on Tom McGurk the other morning when he had a discussion about future energy and this guy from Derry is pushing it saying it would basically be great for Derry, loads of jobs etc, etc. Labour (UK that is) said after launching its recent energy policy that none of the new nuclear builds would be in Northern Ireland.
 
I'm still anti-nuclear. There are two main reasons;

1. The plant itself will probably contaminate the environment. Just take a look at this link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_nuclear_accidents
Are these accidents suddenly going to stop?

2. Where are we going to put the waste? People don't even want incinerators, never mind nuclear waste dumps! - let me guess, we can ship it over to those infortunate souls living in Mayak.
 
How many died as a result of those accidents? very few, do you realise the levels of radiation your exposed to in your lifetime? Modern plants are very safe and the waste can be put back into the earth where it came from. My only concerns would be that the real cost is much greater than other energy sources.
 

I would disagree. Turbine technology is improving very quickly, with the most powerful turbine currently available rated 6MW, and more typical turbines 1-2MW. In addition these can reach 40% capacity in Ireland compared to 20% in mainland Europe. So if it is commercially viable to erect these things in Austria (at 20% capacity); it must be (it is) very lucrative to build them in Ireland. Combine with more pumped storage schemes Ireland could easily generate enough power for the whole country.

At the moment Ireland already has a total installed capacity of 600MW from wind energy. That is the same as Tarbert (the third largest power plant in Ireland). Airtricity alone (who only make up a 25% share of wind energy in ireland at the moment) has planning permission granted for an additional 200MW. Other companies have p.p for many more wind farms also.

Also we could utilise offshore far more - the Arklow bank only has seven 3.6MV turbines and already produces 25MV - imagine if they actually did build the 200 of them that was planned at first? That would be 720MW of power capacity - all off shore and largely out of sight. Our famous Moneypoint only produces 900MW and manages to power nearly 20% of the country. So in theory self sufficency could be achieved by:

  • Actually finishing the Arklow Bank
  • Building 4-5 more major offshore windfarms
  • Completeing all existing planning-permission-granted windfarms; no more than that needed!
  • Building 2 or 3 more pumped storage schemes

If you did that we would hit about 100% supply (after allowing for 40% max operating capacity; and the increase in demand over next few years). If implemented, our landscape would not alter much from today and visual pollution would be no worse than today really.

Now imagine if we built 10 offshore farms of 250 5MW turbines each? And doubled on-shore capacity? And used solar, hydro, and wave power also? Obviously one can only speculate and dream - but seriously the potential exists for us to export perhaps 3 times our own needs. Thats billions and billions of euros worth of green power, thousends of new jobs, important export earnings leading to a very favorable balance of trade, more tax receipts of course, energy security, and a huge amount of interenational respect, admiration and prestige.

One last thing... image thirty 300 6MW turbine farms offshore, quadruppling existing onshore turbine numbers and replaceing existing farms with far more efficent and powerful turbines... i'm far too enthusiastic and of course its all a dream, never likely to be a reality - but it really really really could be!
 
ivuernis said:
true, but it a much more highly concentrated form, thus more toxic
Click to expand...
Which would you rather leave your children one or two warehouse full of toxic waste or the impact of climate change due to global warming forever more.

For me going Nuclear is a no brainer. I don't see it as something we can rule out. I don't see us as having the choice of wind OR solar OR nuclear, I see it as we're going to need every bit of energy we can get and no one of those clean sources is going to provide it so we're going to need all of them.
 
daveirl said:
Which would you rather leave your children one or two warehouse full of toxic waste or the impact of climate change due to global warming forever more.
Click to expand...
Preferably neither but if I really had to choose it would be the former... the lesser of two evils perhaps.

I'd rather see us exhaust the possibilities of wind, wave and solar alongside fossil fuel conservation before going down the nuclear route, perhaps even waiting up to 50 years to see if commercial scale nuclear fusion is feasible after the ITER project.

I'd also like to see Personal Carbon Credits introduced to begin the long process of mitigating climate change, reducing fossil fuel consumption and redistributing wealth evenly but I don't see it happening.

I think it's incumbent upon current generations to do as much as possible to bequeath a habitable planet to future generations and I don't see nuclear fission as a way to do it.
 

That's why you build them off shore! Although personally I think that a wind farm, properly situated, is far from a blight on the landscape. I took a drive to Bellmullet recently and thought they actually looked quite nice whirling away on the hillside there. Windmills are seen as picturesque part of the Dutch landscape so why not as part of the Irish countryside? Much prettier than an oil generator anyway.

And before someone brings up the argument "but they kill birds", well so do all large buildings. And so does climate change. The RSPB in Britain support "appropriately positioned" wind farms.
 
autumnleaf said:
And before someone brings up the argument "but they kill birds", well so do all large buildings. And so does climate change.
Click to expand...
... and airplane engines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register