4 ms·

We also have interconnects that pull power from the UK and soon France too. We're fully aware of our dependence on fossil fuels (though what's down in that map

We also have interconnects that pull power from the UK and soon France too. We're fully aware of our dependence on fossil fuels (though what's down in that map as 'coal' for Ireland is mostly actually turf, not coal). The whole point of this exercise is to move away from it and diversify our energy sources. The whole point of interconnects is so that as we ramp up on renewable sources, we need some way to smooth out the ramp-up and ramp-down. We already produce/store as much from hydro as we can. We have the same issue as the Netherlands has in that Ireland is a relatively flat country. Negligence in the UK regarding their nuclear energy sector pretty much killed any chance of a nuclear power plant ever existing on the island of Ireland. That might chance when practical non-fissile nuclear sources come along, but not yet. This isn't greenwashing: this is a sign of progress. Nobody expects a single renewable source to be a panacea, nor that they'll eliminate the need for non-renewables any time soon. However, they do allow us to transition to a state where we're less dependent on them and can stretch out our supply.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
> Negligence in the UK regarding their nuclear energy sector pretty much killed any chance of a nuclear power plant ever existing on the island of Ireland Huh? How does that follow? Besides I thought Ireland started and abandoned building a nuclear plant sometime in the 70s. I know nuclear is currently prohibited there, but not why, only that it was fairly recent.
- talideon 7y ago
  You've heard of Sellafield, right? That's what finally killed any chance of a nuclear plant being set up in Ireland. The Carnsore Point plant was mooted in the 70s, but the opposition was so great it had to be shelved. There's some talk of a gen IV plant being built to replace Moneypoint, but I can't see it happening. It's not prohibited, but the opposition to it amongst the population is great enough that it's not feasible politically.
  - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
    Fair enough - I assumed it couldn't be that as the worst cock ups were far further back than Carnsore era - like the Windscale fire in the 50s. That and governments everywhere not really doing much consultation or reaction to public opinion back then. Recent issues have seemed more of privatisation than negligence - still not what we want of nuclear of course. I'd like decommissioning to go far smoother as they're just down the road from us, should there be another cock up. Wikipedia seems to think it is prohibited - 1999 Electricity Regulation Act. I only ever heard oblique references to it being banned, with no further explanation, so I know nothing more. Even Wikipedia raises more questions than answers.
    - talideon 7y ago
      Oh, it very much is: Windscale and Sellafield are linked in the public mind here. Here, Sellafield was seen as a rebranding exercise for Windscale. > Wikipedia seems to think it is prohibited - 1999 Electricity Regulation Act. I was careful with my use of language: it's not illegal, but under 18.6 of the act, "An order under this section shall not provide for the use of nuclear fission for the generation of electricity." So it's not _illegal_ or banned, but the goverment simply won't grant licenses. Also, it specifically refers to fission. Something like the thorium fuel cycle might be considered legal under the act, depending on how you read it.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

> Negligence in the UK regarding their nuclear energy sector pretty much killed any chance of a nuclear power plant ever existing on the island of Ireland Huh? How does that follow? Besides I thought Ireland started and abandoned building a nuclear plant sometime in the 70s. I know nuclear is currently prohibited there, but not why, only that it was fairly recent.

talideon 7y ago
You've heard of Sellafield, right? That's what finally killed any chance of a nuclear plant being set up in Ireland. The Carnsore Point plant was mooted in the 70s, but the opposition was so great it had to be shelved. There's some talk of a gen IV plant being built to replace Moneypoint, but I can't see it happening. It's not prohibited, but the opposition to it amongst the population is great enough that it's not feasible politically.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Fair enough - I assumed it couldn't be that as the worst cock ups were far further back than Carnsore era - like the Windscale fire in the 50s. That and governments everywhere not really doing much consultation or reaction to public opinion back then. Recent issues have seemed more of privatisation than negligence - still not what we want of nuclear of course. I'd like decommissioning to go far smoother as they're just down the road from us, should there be another cock up. Wikipedia seems to think it is prohibited - 1999 Electricity Regulation Act. I only ever heard oblique references to it being banned, with no further explanation, so I know nothing more. Even Wikipedia raises more questions than answers.
  - talideon 7y ago
    Oh, it very much is: Windscale and Sellafield are linked in the public mind here. Here, Sellafield was seen as a rebranding exercise for Windscale. > Wikipedia seems to think it is prohibited - 1999 Electricity Regulation Act. I was careful with my use of language: it's not illegal, but under 18.6 of the act, "An order under this section shall not provide for the use of nuclear fission for the generation of electricity." So it's not _illegal_ or banned, but the goverment simply won't grant licenses. Also, it specifically refers to fission. Something like the thorium fuel cycle might be considered legal under the act, depending on how you read it.