Originally Posted by Dios

Fossil fuels are heavily subsidised. You might say that doesn't count since its in a foreign country, but if they stop their subsidies, you can bet it will starting counting in a big hurry then. But not to worry, its not like Russia would ever, er, do anything like... hrm...


What. Operation Ajax that spawned modern day Iran was directly due to a conflict over oil. And thats the very tip of the iceberg. If you had to do it again, from scratch, wind and electrical infrastructure are far cheaper.


Yes, yes we do.

Net energy exporter. Nice.

Originally Posted by Geckko

It is the ubiquity of this type of ill informed thinking that brought about Ireland's economic history:

70 years of unecessary poverty, followed by 15 years of monetary bubble and mad debt fueled spending, now to be followed by return to relative poverty.

It sucks that I have to pay for it.

Originally Posted by _soma_

Just going to put a disclaimer before my remarks here - I'm a fully paid-up democratic capitalist - but the following is my cold logical opinion.

This kind of transition is not possible in any kind of 'democracy' that we would recognise as such today - which is why it can be done in somewhere like Cuba. Incredibly tough & unpopular decisions will need to be taken (and more importantly, enforced) to transition to a lower-energy/non-fossil-fuel culture.

NIMBY-ism would need to be swept aside, contract-law & property rights superseded in many cases etc etc. Society at large does not understand the degree to which our food & energy supplies are tied to fossil fuels.

Originally Posted by Geckko

It is the ubiquity of this type of ill informed thinking that brought about Ireland's economic history:

70 years of unecessary poverty, followed by 15 years of monetary bubble and mad debt fueled spending, now to be followed by return to relative poverty.

It sucks that I have to pay for it.

Originally Posted by Geckko

Enough that we don't need to resort to Soviet style central planning.

Nobody directed the use of oil in the global economy, it happened as technology changed and it became the cheapest, most efficient source of energy.

The same will happen again out the other side. We don't need central planning. My expectation is that if we can keep politicians and political lobby groups like the greenies well away then in around 100 years we will be witnessing a drop in the absolute level of oil demand as some of the present infant technologies (solar/wind/tidal etc.) begin to pay their way, combined with a gradual rise in oil prices (i.e. over multi-decadal periods).

Note that already, we see a relative drop in oil demand - we use less and less for each $/€/Yen of output/income we produce.

Originally Posted by cactusflower

We do. Look at the mess that privatisation has made of our broadband / telecoms services.

We only have one national grid. For wind and wave energy to be used to any significant extent, the national grid must be upgraded. Privatisation would very likely mean it would fall into the hands of carbon or nuclear fuel interests or the asset stripping types that bought up our telecoms.

Originally Posted by Geckko

Tell me about the price and quality of broadband services under the state-owned monopoly telecoms operator so I can make a comparison.

Originally Posted by Dios

In both this and the other wind thread you have been vociferous, resolute, and unyielding in your opposition to wind produced energy, and entirely without a single fact or supporting bit of evidence to back you up, flying in the face of most of western Europe, which begs to differ with your point of view.

Your pet budgie came out second best against a wind turbine when you were ten?

Originally Posted by Geckko

I am vociferous against people who just make claims like " it is good" and then demand tax payers money to make it happen.

It really is very simple. If wind generation technology was competitive and viable it would be here now. What we have in Ireland is there by legal fiat. ESB is required by law to buy it.

The only evidence I need is plainly obvious. If wind generated electritiy made such a strong economic case, it would be happending and wouldn't need public money.

You just can't trump that fact.

If you want to buy electricity from windfarms, I won't stop you. I am arguing against me being forced to buy it. I want to choose for myself and I can see what is the cheaper option.

Originally Posted by Geckko

I am vociferous against people who just make claims like " it is good" and then demand tax payers money to make it happen.

It really is very simple. If wind generation technology was competitive and viable it would be here now. What we have in Ireland is there by legal fiat. ESB is required by law to buy it.

The only evidence I need is plainly obvious. If wind generated electritiy made such a strong economic case, it would be happending and wouldn't need public money.

You just can't trump that fact.

If you want to buy electricity from windfarms, I won't stop you. I am arguing against me being forced to buy it. I want to choose for myself and I can see what is the cheaper option.