Exporting electricity

Minister Rabbitte is a great man and I believe everything he says. He ran a press conference from my shop in Grafton Street in February 2011 promising all commercial tenants market rents. Fairytales from Ireland.

With all this great news is there a general election or referendum coming soon?.

Richard,
The strategy announced yesterday is I believe, as you state, the beginning of the public discourse on the future of Irelands renewables industry.

But I very much doubt that it marks the beginning of a process whereby Irish taxpayers are to subsidise UK energy consumers via REFIT although perhaps the opposite may turn out to be the case.

Rather than EU targets being the focus, it should perhaps simply be regarded as just another area of commerce, one in which Ireland has the natural resources to compete.

I would welcome an Aarhus debate and would also welcome an open debate on a possible future role for nuclear, possibly as a replacement for coal or peat fired generation.

Only a fool puts all his eggs in one basket.

Rabbitte published a disappointing “Renewable Energy Strategy 2012-2020” yesterday. It contains no measurable targets, no tangible goals, merely a collection of aspirations. The list of action items start with phrases like ‘Liaise with’, ‘Review’, ‘Work with our partners’, ‘Encourage’…

Wind electricity export to the UK is an attractive prospect but there needs to be some quantification of likely costs and benefits.

Eddie O’Connor’s company, Mainstream, was reported on the weekend to be looking at a 5GW privately owned interconnector to the UK. How likely is this and where does privately owned grid infrastructure fit in with the state’s plans?

Here is the article on the proposed private interconnector for anyone interested:
https://twitter.com/smytho/status/207021876072038400/photo/1

@Ossian

“Rabbitte published a disappointing “Renewable Energy Strategy 2012-2020″ yesterday. It contains no measurable targets, no tangible goals, merely a collection of aspirations. The list of action items start with phrases like ‘Liaise with’, ‘Review’, ‘Work with our partners’, ‘Encourage’…”

Is it not the case that DCENR are signalling to the industry that the ball is now in their court, develop viable initiatives and government are interested.

@Richard

You propose in your OP that wind farms in Ireland would be owned by UK companies, they might be as Irish companies currently own wind farms in the UK.

However even humble Irish consumers can own a wind farm as has been illustrated by West Clare Renewables Ltd, a co-op.

The electricity market is not like any other market that you know about. Both supply and demand are basically ‘inelastic’ as the economists say, i.e., they don’t change in response to price. The punters still want to boil their kettles, and if the wind isn’t blowing, it doesn’t matter how high the price is at that moment, it still won’t blow. (Similarly, you can’t just bring gas or oil generating capacity online on-tap, you need to invest years ahead.)

The electricity is sent around the country through a transmission network of wires and pylons. This is diversified, which basically means that there are multiple routes to any given point. This is to ensure supply doesn’t get cut off completely just because there’s a problem at one point.

If you want to ‘play’ in the electricity market, you do so by buying out of or selling into various pools. You do not need to build your own supply chain, you can buy everything from somebody else for a transparent price. The business consultants might call this ‘vertically disintegrated’ (as opposed to ‘vertically integrated’ as the ESB-controlled market used to be). So the transmission charge you pay is a proportion of the total cost of operating the transmission network. Equally, when you buy power, you buy out of a ‘pool’. You cannot buy power directly from the generator, nor can you operate your own transmission, except in the most limited circumstances.

This is all very theoretically sound. There are some operational issues with it (mostly people complaining that the overall time and money cost of adding new transmission is too high. This is basically the sort of issue we see in relation to the interconnector described above. Some people disagree with how eirgrid is going about the whole thing. I have no idea who is right or wrong in this instance.

If you are the British government, there is absolutely no reason why you would not take electricity out of the Irish pool, and send it on into the UK. Someone would obviously have to build these wind turbines in order to supply the power, but that is no big deal, if HMG is willing to enter into a forward contract of some sort with a prospective generator. Equally, there is no reason for you to build your own transmission system, when there is an adequate company already in place here to run the transmission network, and to boot, you would get the benefit of the diversity of this existing network.

(I have left out the subtlety here in relation to identifying the source of the power as renewable, or whatever. Again, that is done through identifying various types of pools of electricity. I feel reassured that this is well accounted for, though to be honest, it sounded very fishy to me at the beginning.

The whole point of this for the British government would be that a greater proportion of their electricity would come from renewable sources. As well as the warm and fuzzy feelings this would instill, and the fact that it would help the UK meet its EU targets, it would also diversify their range of supplies away from oil, gas and nuclear. This would have economic benefits. Even if this project were expensive, it would still be cheaper or at least competitive with the economic and political costs of building more nukes to replace their aging existing plant. (As I understand it, Great Britain is not really in a good place as regards generating capacity. They are underinvested for the future and they are in a rush to get enough new projects online before their old capacity starts to wind down at the end of its useful life.)

For us in Ireland, it would make all our wind energy more valuable, because we would have a new customer who would basically have to buy our electricity, and it would also mean that we would have access to renewable energy from other parts of these islands at times when the wind isn’t blowing in our own fair land. In practical terms, this could or should reduce the PSO levy on your (and Irish-based industry’s) bill. The extra guaranteed cash into eirgrid for transmission should also mean that our transmission will attract reinvestment and this should lead to stable or dropping costs, alongside a higher quality of service.

So this is all about forming bigger pools. The whole thing is basically a cooperative market, not a competitive one. This is basically what an intergovernmental agreement would be all about.

Strategic Goal 4

Increase sustainable energy use in the Transport sector through
biofuels and electrification.

“Sustainable energy use” through “Biofuels” ??????

This is incredible rubbish. Biofuels are a very unsustainable commodity. This should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of knowledge about growing crops. Grow trees. They are not exactly free, but if cropped and re-planted correctly they are a suitable fuel source. Pretty to look at and soak up lots of carbon dioxide. The fallen leaves are excellent soil regenerators. Biofuels!!!!!! Easter Island syndrome again! Yeast are more intelligent than humans after all.

Transport sector HAS TO REDUCE! Is there anyone in the ministry office paying attention to reality?

Transport in Ireland is over 90% dependent on imported fuels. So we have some utter dopes in the ministry advocating we substitute an expensive commodity for an even more expensive one. It is only when you strip out the ‘incentives’ looted from our taxpayers that you expose the real cost (in energy terms!). But that would be a tad uncomfortable for some folk.

Sustainability – or whatever else you want to term it, means you produce less each year you consume less each year, you service less each year, year-on-year until you balance your resources. Sustainability DOES NOT mean that you are free to pursue business-as-usual (Permagrowth) by attempting to use ‘green’ or renewable (it should be re-usable) primary energy sources to generate a secondary energy resource. It sheer lunacy.

Last friday, Rabbitte also cancelled the carbon credit windfall tax on electricity producers. This tax raised €75m. Is this revenue that the state no longer needs? This windfall levy was previously discussed here.

@Brian Woods Snr
How do you feel about woods as a feedstock for biofuel? There has been much research into the sustainability of various biofuels in the past few years when doubts emergedabout the whole idea. Different feedstocks come with differing energy returns which also depend heavily on local climate. A real fear is that imported biofuels will be generated in environmentally damaging ways abroad.

Better than using renewable energy sources in transport is to switch to public transport, walk, cycle or avoid the journey altogether.

@Antoin
Price elasticities do exist in domestic electricity; how else do you explain people staying up late to turn on their washing machines and dishwashers!?

@Richard
You seem to have more details of the plan than have been published. Would you like to share something with the group?

The above budgeted extension to the tram in Clermont – Ferrand.

http://www.cyberbougnat.net/La-ligne-de-tramway-prolongee,3651.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-8RvKivpvY

The French policey seems to orbit as always around the use of its cheap electricity for Transport and of course good old fashioned protectionism.

Yes , the projected costs at least for the tram extension was 30 million ~
see article 1.8
http://www.auvergne.pref.gouv.fr/amenagement/etat_region/index2.php

There are so many things rancid about this as a statement of renewable energy policy that it’s hard to know where to start.

Overall, it reeks of ‘special pleading’ by vested interests, state and private, in the sector. Even the one ‘big idea’ – there had to be something newsworthy to provide a focus for the Minister’s press release – of creating an export opportunity to the UK and North West Europe (wherever that may be) for Irish wind energy is equivocated: “provided this is economically beneficial to this state.”

According to Richard’s anlaysis, this is a dubious proposition. So we may presume that the talks with his British Minister will proceed and Minister Rabbitte will have several opportunities to inform the media of their progress …. and nothing much will happen beyond the promise of much happening. Otherwise, God help us.

The entire document reads more like a PR puff piece for the renewables industry than an effort at any serious analysis of this area of energy policy. My heart sank, as it always does, when the old giveaway line that all this guff is inspired more by vanity than realistic prospects popped up in the narrative, that old ‘world leader’ paradigm. Whenever you see that in a government publication or a political statement, you just know these people are in trouble. Thus we are assured that Ireland Ireland has the capacity “to become a world leader” in testing the next generation of offshore renewable equipment; that Ireland could become a “world leader in renewable energy integration and smart grid technology” and Ireland is on course to become a “world centre for energy and ICT research and innovation.”

The cock crowed thrice…

@Veronica

“that Ireland could become a world leader in renewable energy integration and smart grid technology”

energyco-ops.ie is less than 6 months old and already have confirmed interest totaling just under 1400 households for participating in the first smart grid trials involving local local generation and consumption of energy produced from various technologies.

The world is changing as we speak.

@Pat
If that true , then the Waterford / Rosslare line should reopen for those Beet Campaigns.
In truth many such lines are only viable as mixed Passenger DMU / cargo rail routes and it was probally the real reason for its closure.

Although in my humble opinion far more oil would be saved rather then produced if Waterford harbour was used as a major ship to rail transfer point for Irish farm inputs and perhaps outputs transporting Fertilizer , feedstock etc to various new Hub points in the Golden Vale such as Cahir (new 400m rail head maybe ?) or using older unused rail such as the Silvermines rail spur or very central areas such as Ballybrophy..as truck distribution points.
Ditto for carrying Beeron rail once again….a no Brainer given its weight.

@Pat Gill

The world is always changing…and our little neck of the woods has changed irrevocably.

The renewables sector has relied for far too long on creating an image for itself as ‘clean’ energy, which it is not; as ‘free’ energy, where it’s prohibitively expensive; as ‘efficient’ energy, even it’s frequently the opposite and as green and wholesome and caring and sustainable, all of which are arguable propositions when applied to any method of energy generation.

Gullible politicians and administrators have latched onto the so-called environmentally friendly and sustainable image of the renewable sector’s sales pitch and, to my mind, spoiled the potential of the renewables sector with subsidies. Subsidies that can no longer be afforded by society, which is why they are being dismantled in several EU states as we speak.

By all means, Minister Rabbitte should press ahead with his wind export business to the UK, provided it is not at a cost to the Irish exchequer in the form of subsidies and investments or on a promise of ‘jam tomorrow’ in profits that cannot be demonstrated as ever likely to materialise.

Instead of assembling an adivsory group of vested interests from the renewables sector, as proposed in the Minister’s strategy document, it might be better to appoint a couple of international energy economists to examine the merits of the wind energy export idea before a penny of public money is invested any further in it. As the government never tires of reminding us, every cent spent in one area means one cent less available somewhere else. The days of vanity projects, exemplified by the ‘world class’ mantra of the renewables PR-speak, are over.

@ Anton and Pat: Thanks for those comments.

Have to think about the sugar/ethanol matter. We used to have an ethanol plant sometime ago?? You need to conduct an energy out v energy in audit. Ratio must be 5/1 to be anyway meaningful.

Ethanol is a carbohydrate fuel – has about 1/3 the energy of longer-chain hydrocarbons. Its the bang that counts! Ethanol is a complement, not a substitute. Have to re-formulate ICE fuels to avoid corrosion.

In the name of Jove. Could we not just reduce our fleet of private vehicles? Or at least get vehicles which do double the distance for the same fuel consumption – even if this means reducing speed limits to 80 kph. And enforcing the damn limit.

Mandate all long-distance container transport to rail and put severe restrictions on road freight (vehicle size and max tare). If we do not do this, then Mr Price will do it for us.

No amount of electrical power can substitute fully for liquid hydrocarbon fuel. This very nasty lesson will just have to be experienced the very hard way. It will never be learnt.

@ Richard Tol,

I would suggest Royalties should be imposed, but only after the initial cost of the investment is recouped by the investors.

Not sure what figures are being thrown about, but Ossian Smyth mentions a figure of 5 Gw above, Mainstream?

With a generator of 1 Mw, then that is 5000 generators, but as the load factor is only around 31%, this figure would have to rise to 16,666 generators approx.

In addition it would be prudent to disperse the generators into different areas, so that if there is calm in region A, regions B & C should still be producing some power.

However 16,666 wind generators is a bit of an eyesore, and a lot of light flicker as well. Perhaps one will have to wear special glasses to visit these areas?

Even if the generator is increased to 2 Mw, one is still looking at 2,777 units per region.

Perhaps offshore would be better, from a aesthetic perspective, even though it could be cost prohibitive and the technology might not be up to the harsh environment just yet.

To make a profit wind turbine generators have to be sited for optimal power production. Anything else is a waste of money. The day will come when the public will be begging for power and to be opposed on aesthetic grounds will be seen as the height of folly. Wait for oil north of $200 a barrel with rush hour traffic being bicycles as in those old movies from the thirties and forties.

In the meantime schemes that are sub optimal should be eschewed.

@Pat,
Many thanks for that link, but I don’t immediately see anything in it addressing whether the operating profits it projects under any of the various operating scenarios it analyses are sufficient to cover the cost of capital.

Simply achieving an operating profit on a capital intensive operation such as a pumped storage facility does not indicate that it makes any economic sense.

@ Mickey Hickey,

You are right about the wind generator having to be sited correctly. But this applies to just about everything. Fish have to be sited correctly i.e. in the water for them to function and survive.

A very interesting link on wikipedia about Shepards Flat wind farm, planned for August 2012, link here..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepherds_Flat_Wind_Farm

Some snippets of info..

845 Mw, 338 wind generators, type GE 2.5 XL, Generator height 75 to 100 meters, rotor diameter 100m, 30 sq miles of wind farm, 400 people employed in construction and once operational 35 permanent employees,
5 million dollars income for the county, 16 million dollars income for the state of Oregon.

No mention of external contractors which I am sure would be employed for maintenance etc. So number of people employed would be greater than 35.

If we assume a 33% load factor, then this site probably generates 278 Mw on average. Thats about 18 times smaller than 5 GW mentioned above.

Lets Scale up to 5 Gw.

18 X 35 = 630 permanent jobs. 18 X 16 M$ = 288 m$ income / year. 18 X 30 sq miles = 540 sq miles by comparison Co Dublin is 356 sq miles.

Finances, well there it gets more complicated, but it mentions 1.2 Billion $ for the generators and a 10 year service contract, a 1.3 billion dollar loan by the Dept of Energy.

Perhaps more jobs could be created by the Govt insisting on a plant being built in Ireland, which would employ people here to make all these generators.

A Norwegian consortium is building a 9GW wind farm in Dogger Bank. Completion 2016.

Also relevant to this thread is this EU RFP for interconnect projects:
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/infrastructure/consultations/20120607_non_tyndp_projects_en.htm

It is not clear what is in it for Ireland: English-owned turbines generating power for England, transported over English-owned transmission lines.

Are you quite sure that you managed to mention “English” enough, instead of the UK or British?

A certain saying about patriotism and refuges springs to mind.

BeeCeeTee,

“Simply achieving an operating profit on a capital intensive operation such as a pumped storage facility does not indicate that it makes any economic sense.”

I thoroughly agree, however it is a positive beginning to the analysis when the glamour role is shown to be profitable. The thesis simply modelled the profit improvements enjoyed by a single wind farm connected to storage, and scale is important, generation, pumping and storage capacity .

Additionally it did not model ancillary service income which in a market the size of the imminent FUI will be substantial and its energy sources were restrictive .

The next stage of the high level analysis might be to take a look at the annual accounts of First Hydro Ltd, the operators of Dinorwig, the necessary details for the search are here http://www.fhc.co.uk/about.htm

Valueing all of the societal and system benefits is a little harder but progressing satisfactorily.

@The Dork of Cork,

The French nuclear industry and grid is dependent for its very viability on pumped hydro.

@Pat
Sure , the French Hydro Industry was the Nuclear industry of its time.
Travel to the Alps or Pyrenees and you see even early 20th century investments , pipes with Titanic like Rivets still operational in some areas with various subterranean tunnels etc. etc.
But they mainly use simple dams on the upper levels of rivers / Corries which release energy slowly (after icemelt) to a central Hydro plant below.

This is a more recently built dam
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Étang_de_Soulcem
which is one of many sourses which focus to a point in the town of Tarascon below.
enipedia.tudelft.nl/wiki/Pla_De_Soulcem_Powerplant

@Pat
Sure there is waste….. but in the final anylasis it saves a huge amount of Natural Gas , that can be used for more effiecent uses.

The French were always best at that strange synthesis of planning and engineering since the days of Vauban at least.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sébastien_Le_Prestre_de_Vauban

At the the mid point of that valley using Gravity to the maximum – there was a old Aluminium factory now gone. (Y2003)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36739189@N02/3385568083

http://www.sculpture-metaux.com/order_realizations.html

We have a different tradition….
Going back to a more recent time…….. Irish Steel.

Of burning precious Gas for strange uses given our energy envoirment … now using gas to create electricity to carry out thee most energy intensive of operations , turning Bauxite into aluminium.

There is little or no analogy to be made between exploitation of renewing resources like wind and non-renewing mineral resources like gas and oil. They are completely different things.

@Antoin,
Ordinarily I would probably agree, but not if a separate private grid is used for transmission. There are a limited number of locations suitable for erecting turbines to capture wind energy. I would expect any private company interested in exploiting those resources to sign very long leases on the turbine sites. If as the article suggests our grid is not utilized for transmission, we lose access to the resource for at a minimum the duration of the lease. It could then become economically unviable to amend the situation in 100(?) years when the leases expire. I’ve obviously made gross assumptions in this, but in the medium term, I see it as being no different to the export of any other resource, renewable or otherwise.

@IGenerallyDisagree,

Its progressing well, three years or so ago the concept was first discussed on this site and now it is being discussed as part of Government strategy, with two competitors joining the fray to be first past the post.

By 2016, Ireland will join France and the UK in the FUI regional electricity market, possessing a strong national grid, adequate interconnection and large scale electricity storage facilities will enable Ireland to compete aggressively in this market.

The SEM will also have to evolve to some extent to allow intra day trading.

Smart Grid technology will further change the energy landscape allowing the introduction of the prosumer concept, producing and consuming at all scales including domestic.

If Ireland does not harvest its renewable resources for its own benefit they will blow over our heads to the UK and Europe or bounce of the west coast and return to the US.

Those benefits are both primary and secondary and their scope is wide.

High level info is available at http://www.energyco-ops.ie detail is available to your appetite.

@Antoin
Let’s agree that no one in their right mind would build a dedicated grid.

It appears Pat Rabbit has not got the memo

http://www.businessnewsonline.org/?p=230667

What is so hard to understand ?
Both Solar & Wind are Diffuse ,Unreliable energy sourses.

It does not matter much if Spain is Sunny or Ireland is windy.

It requires oil to build all things – including my favourite investments, Dense base load Nuclear (save Nat Gas & coal) & Rail.(Saving Gasoline & Diesel

The wind bangs for your Buck is pathetic , the opportunity costs must be huge.

Imagine how much highly valuable gasoline & diesel is saved if 120,000 people use these vehicles with Nuclear powered electricity…

http://www.trams-in-france.net/montpellier.htm

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montpellier_tramway

The Spanish and Italian electricity industry lost its long term capacity when they both gave up on Nuclear in the early /mid 80s.

@Pat,
If you are interested in making people think that pumped storage and wind can together cover their cost of capital without subsidy (or even with current Irish levels of subsidy on wind), you should probably try to do better than referencing an undergraduate project that covers a small part of the question and a pair of Welsh pumped storage operations with a completely different business model. Answering the most commonly identified economic problem with pumped storage with semi-relevancies doesn’t do much to advance your case – more the reverse.

@BeeCeeTee,

If that were indeed my interest you would be correct, my purpose though is simply to provoke a little flexibility of thought on the question of replacing subsidy via technology and market instruments.

And taking my two references together should provide a starting point for an interested reader in that regard.

Presenting the particular business of a commercial company is surely the job of that companies finance director and I am not he or she.

I merely present an itch to be scratched from the position of a private citizen with an opinion and an interest in other opinions.

@Dork

“The wind bangs for your Buck is pathetic , the opportunity costs must be huge”

What drives your strong negative opinions when it comes to renewables and your polar opposite positive views on nuclear – it comes across as highly unbalanced – maybe both have merits? What about wind plus normal hydro? One thing for sure is that Pat Sword’s fantasy of 2-3c per kWh for nuclear is far greater than any tall tales the renewable industry have come up with. Maybe in another life as a Japanese taxpayer/electricity consumer you would like to have contributed to the Monju Project?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monju_Nuclear_Power_Plant

A poorly phrased sentence. My point on the relationship between costs in wind and pumped storage is that while onshore wind is more or less cost effective by itself provided it can be absorbed by users, adding the capital cost of pumped storage in order to time-shift wind power supply makes the combination of the two very expensive.

@Tim
Its a question of energy density – wind and solar is just too diffuse,at least for post 18th century lifestyles – therefore the capital expended for the output is very low and unreliable –

As for Hydro most of the large low hanging fruit has been plucked…. (see Norway) with significant negative effects to the wilder areas of Europe.

I can’t see how oil or gas can be completly replaced – especially for transport given the much higher capital costs of battery powered cars etc. etc.

The best we can do is to try to replicate at least some of the transport network as it was before the rise of the Bus in the 1930s & the private car post war.

But the dramatic wastage of a highly valuable fuel (Nat Gas) for electricity can be slowed at least for base load operations via Nuclear build – however the expertise has been stripped from this Industry since the $ bull run of 1980.
Nuclear is therefore not possible in Ireland as even the UK is now incapable of new Build.

We should put all our efforts into rail.
For example a rail line to Youghal would cost perhaps 85 -90 ~ million.
This would make it a 3/4 railcar DMU service rather then the present 2 railcar DMU to Midleton with fuel savings per passenger.
The daily outbound (No. 260) 18 bus routes to Youghal can be cut to a skeleton service.
The Mogeely(3) bus diversion can be avoided.
Traffic holdups between Kent and Parnell Bus station can be avoided saving more fuel.(although future road traffic may not be that heavy)
A wider rail catchment would benefit Kent insuring more potential passengers on the Cork to Dublin route etc etc.
Youghal – a relatively rationally planned town can be saved.
The band of population between Cork city ,Carrigtwohill , Midleton & Youghal can be linked with the miniumum of oil inputs etc etc.

The 260 coming into Parnell from Kent direction can be seen at the start of this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzEidDJF2aM

It comes down to a question of resourses.
In my opinion almost all road capital expenditure should be directed towards rail both light & heavy.
Wind will not save us much Diesel.

@BeeCeeTee,

I will clarify my first sentence, pumped hydro can, in a wide range of scenarios, effectively replace the need for feed in tariff support for wind energy financing by providing a guaranteed market for output as and when it generates irrspective of system demand, it could also, if required, replace the current imperative for must run status in the presence of a strenghtened regional grid, it can provide balancing, including inertia for renewable integration without incurring a fuel cost. It can provide the above services at a nominal kwh cost in quantity, Turlough Hill is sometimes quoted at a marginal cost of less than a cent per unit per cycle.

It can, in addition, enable ccgt’s or coal stations to run at their most efficient operational settings further reducing fuel costs by minimising ramping.

It can provide energy banking for export and market coupling, occsionally dabble in arbitrage and it can perform all of the above simultaneously and more.

It is a very flexible and cost effective piece of infrastructure with a design life between major overhauls of perhaps fifty years.

In addition, the scale of the plants envisaged in the governments strategy document would serve international as well as domestic market and would have the capacity necessary to integrate ocean energy as and when it arrives and enable renewable and conventional generation to cost effectively service an increasing transport market for electricity.

Turlough Hill was built in the 1970’s to balance a small nuclear plant which never built, despite this minor setback the plant has been cost effectively earning its keep ever since.

Nowhere in the world is pumped hydro publicly subsidised, instead the market pays for its commercial services via capacity and ancillary service charges in addition to the plant participating in the energy market per se.

I will not be tempted to reveal commercial IP to make my case but perhaps one more publicly available piece of research at random from among a multitude of new work on this new subject.
http://www.abve.org.br/downloads/bcg_-_revisiting_energy_storage.pdf

The market may indeed prefer to continue business as usual but my instinct says it might.

Well Ireland cannot stop the price of Diesel rising , building a few windmills will not stop the diesel rising – Europe maybe, if it dumped all those new Diesel private cars.
The Irish energy objective should not be to stop the diesel price rising – its to reduce the amount of high value Euro exports for fuel which is squeezing discretionary domestic demand.
.
A 2 carriage modern DMU is generally a bit more effiecent then a Bus (if full)
If you can extend the line , more passengers get on in Kent = a more effiecent 3 or 4 carriage carriage service therefore less BTUs per person.

Once the monetary system changes….. as in the UK ( the ratio of money and credit is changing because of QE although they are not producing enough money to replace the credit that is being paid down)
Rail captures the new flow as cars are credit dependent.
Its a no Brainer , once we are out of the Euro even lines such as New Ross to Waterford will become viable.

Look at the UK rail stats over the years…. its telling us something , in the midst of a European depression UK rail passengers are growing 5.6% YoY

http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.1527

The UK Monetary policey is the primary reason why NIR is booming while IR is in the doldrums.
Belfast to Derry passenger numbers
Y2006/7 : 1,021,000
Y2011 :1,477,000

Its a small island but Northern Ireland is smaller…. why is there a general rise of passenger numbers in N.I. ?
The longer distances should make southern Ireland a more optimal rail envoirment.
Why ?

@Sporthog,

My opinion.

Re 1) Ireland currently operates a pool type, day ahead electricity market with capacity payments and with extremely limited intra day trading, this market type has advantages that other countries are beginning to covet, most other European markets are of a different nature and are extremely complex to operate and regulate, as electricity markets develop and integrate throughout the continent I would expect to see incremental moves towards developing pool capabilities along with the SEM introducing more intraday trading.

As electricity storage in most respects operates behind or underneath the pool and retail market, it does not follow that its pumping costs track headline retail rates. For example a CCGT plant in Ireland might have slightly elevated fuel costs over a similar plant in the UK but its marginal costs would be broadly similar, with the advantage over the UK plant of being able to avail of capacity payments to hedge its capital costs.

It looks pretty certain that similar capacity payments will soon also be common place in the UK and Europe to incentivise new capacity of all technologies.

Re 2) Ireland currently has in excess of 1600 MW of wind which was financed on the strenght of a very modest Feed in Tariff, as explained above pumped hydro is not subsidised anywhere.

Re 3) I believe you are referring to the proposal from Mainstream, as I understand that proposal it envisages a large amount of offshore capacity, here is a link to the real map of Ireland and although I take your point about the area required it is insignificant in relation to the resource area http://www.marine.ie/NR/rdonlyres/07A3B2CD-E351-4FD5-86FD-8E06E9FB1A80/0/RealMapofIrelandwithEEZKey_Nov09_web.jpg

Re 4) The ongoing direct employment requirements of an offshore windfarm are not high, they are significantly higher for offshore. The real employment potential for Ireland would be significant employment in the build out phase, lasting perhaps 15 or 20 years, with significant employment coming onstream in both R&D and manufacture of ocean energy plant.

Over time the secondary employment potential is large and driven by the competitive advantage of renewables being able to guarantee stable prices over long time frames, we see that dynamic already happening in such projects as the planned autoproduction wind turbines on the individual premises of the main pharma cluster in Cork harbour and similar increasing renewable autoproduction in the food industry.

Some food related autoproduction takes advantage of the co2 emissions of CHP of various fuel types to enhance horticultural efficiency.

According to the May statement by the EIA “From 2000 to 2010 the average amount spent on oil imports in Europe was USD182 billion a year. In 2011 oil imports reached a record of USD488 billion.”

Oil demand in Europe over the same period increased by only circa 0.5%, the real increase in oil prices over the period averaged 12% per annum, cumulatively over 100% in real terms since 2000 and this trend was mirrored at a minor discount by natural gas prices.

Almost every single grid study undertaken at the beginning of the last decade vastly underestimated the rate of gas price increase.

Consumers both small and large consider such matters as a threat to their future viability and further consider renewables as a sensible hedge against such a threat. As fossil fuel increases in both price and price volatility it brings more renewable technologies into the viability range.

And in my personal opinion it is then that the consumers consider the climate change question, and they do, but in that order.

Sorry but , they are using the brand new 4000s on the Portrush branch !!

What a waste…… on college students !!
OH MY GOD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6d3PanZoLc

Could we sell them a couple of 2700s or something ?

You must question our Brethern up North also.

“KENNEDY GIVES BELFAST TO LARNE DUAL CARRIAGEWAY GREEN LIGHT
Regional Development Minister Danny Kennedy, today, announced his decision to proceed with the £100million A8, Belfast to Larne, dual carriageway scheme.
Having considered the Inspector’s Report into the Public Inquiries on the A8 scheme, the Minister has tasked Roads Service to progress the project, taking into account the Inspector’s recommended amendments. The Inspector recommended that the proposed dual carriageway should be constructed in accordance with the preferred route, which bypasses Bruslee and Ballynure.
Construction of the scheme, by the consortium Lagan, Ferrovail and Costain, will provide 14.4 kilometres of new dual carriageway from Coleman’s Corner Roundabout to Ballyrickard Road. Work on the dual carriageway is expected to start in June this year and take two and a half years to complete.”

See Fig 4.3 (traffic especially commercial has sunk and then flatlined post 2007)
http://www.drdni.gov.uk/a8_poe_traffic_and_economics_final.pdf

This 100 million is being wasted after the disasterous decision not to link up the new CairnRyan port to rail leaving the Stranraer railway as a now dead asset.
http://www.rail.co/2011/04/01/rail-link-for-loch-ryan-port-unlikely
This crazy decsion now affects the Larne railways viability.

Meanwhile another viable line goes unused for the most part with Crumlin town having seen considerable growth since its closure in 2003.
“The Lisburn-Antrim line was returned to passenger service on Sundays 9 and 23 October 2011 when the direct Antrim-Belfast line was closed for points/track renewal at York Road and between Bleach Green Junction and Whiteabbey. Londonderry line services were diverted via Lisburn rather than being substituted by bus, to the appreciation of travelling public.”

@ Pat Gill,

Thanks for that post, informative.

Sorry to drag up old news but since this is plastered all over the media again today I read up a bit on their website. It seems A dedicated grid/transmission system is the plan after all.

http://www.mainstreamrp.com/energy-bridge/

“The Energy Bridge project will capture wind power generated onshore and offshore in Ireland, transport it under the Irish Sea and connect it to the UK via a grid connection that Mainstream has already secured. The cable for transporting the energy from the wind farms is entirely independent of Ireland’s existing electricity system.

Using underground cables we will connect a number of turbines to create a single wind farm. We then connect several wind farms to a regional collector node, forming a wind park. Our underground cable then carries the electricity to the east coast”

@Antoin & Richard, you mention no one in their right mind would build a private grid. So what’s the deal with this then? I still see this as similar to the export of non renewable resources. AFAIK leases on turbine sites are in the region of 100 years, so direct acccess to the resource is basically lost to us. The only difference we won’t run out of wind so the tax stream (such as it will be) should remain for as long as energy is exported.