Only as it should be. Ireland is not just decades behind: it's never been in the running. All new builds should incorporate as much energy capture as is feasible for the site.

__________________
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when creating them

When people think of renewable energy, they often only think of wind turbines and photovoltaic solar panels.

We spend a lot more on space heating and water heating than we do on electricity, and thermal solar panels and biomass (wood, wood chip or wood pellet) are very simple ways of significantly reducing costs.

Waterford City Council are in the process of completing 34 Local Authority houses in Ballygunner which have higher insulation levels, condensing boilers and solar panels.

They are 40% more efficient than the National regulations call for.

The specifications set out in the three Fingal LAPs referred to in the Construct Ireland article (above) will lead to houses that use half the energy per sq/m of these Waterford houses.

This isn't difficult, it isn't overly expensive (and long term it is significantly cheaper), but for whatever reason the DOEHLG and the DCMNR can't seem to get their act together.

__________________
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." Mark Twain

“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoléon Bonaparte

Hi SPN,

I read the articles - very interesting.

The moves by Finglas County Council are a genuine step towards sustainability - these rules should be standard across the country.

Sustainable Progress seems to be the buzzword of my local council (South Dublin) but I'm not aware of them going to any lengths to deliver on it.

Adamstown would have been a perfect project to introduce these kind of regulations.

The thing about using wood and biofuels is that theyre carbon neutral which means that the amount of carbon released when they are burned is equal to the amount they take in when they are growing. I only found that out recently but i suppose there will be someone complaining that im stating the obvious.

but for all those who dont know its an interesting fact. :idea:

__________________
Democracy is the road to socialism-Karl Marx

There's more to it than that, both advantages and disadvantages.

For one thing, biofuels cannot replace petroleum. There isn't enough land although some other technology may sidestep this, such as fuel from bacteria.

As such, biofuel is additional fuel, not alternative fuel. It does nothing to curb demand, which is the problem which no government has the balls to tackle.

Burning wood, on the face of it, is 'carbon neutral'. But will you plant a tree for every one you burn? To do the job properly - to soak up the carbon you've already released using fossil fuels - you need to grow, I don't know, ten trees, probably more, for each one you burn.

You also have the problem of particulates. These are very fine particles which are of a similar size to those from vehicles. They really should be filtered out and collected (from wood-burners) and put back in the ground. In the air, they enter the lungs and the smaller the particle, the worse.

Not to be pessimistic though: things are slowly (not so surely) moving on.

__________________
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when creating them

EU energy chief calls for competition in electricity and gas markets

A couple of points:

1) We had the second lowest prices in the EU before the "Liberal Markets" ideology was brought in.

2) High energy prices are as a result of the increasing costs of inputs. Gas and Oil are rising in price due to many factors, not least depletion, but the existence of "competition" in Ireland has Jack Diddly to do with it.

3) Home owners cannot access independent supply yet. The reason for this is that newcomers cannot make a profit at the price the ESB charges to homeowners. If we want "competition" we will have to have higher retail prices first.

4) Access to Energy is going to be an important issue in the coming decades, as the Commissioner completely understands, so it is incumbent that the control of Energy be for the the public good, and not at the whim of private multinational energy companies.

Ideology is all very well, but when it doesn't work we should move on to something that does.

__________________
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." Mark Twain

“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoléon Bonaparte

Very good points. I'm loathe to say your points are obvious - they are in one sense - but all other senses, those points need making and making often because they appear to be not understood by the majority of our representatives here in Ireland.

Competition without strict and enforceable regulation does not, in the medium to long term, bring down prices: the opposite is true. Lining shareholders' pockets is not in the 'public good' but instead is the sole aim of 'liberalisation'. The obscene profits reported by the oil companies recently is proof of that. Individual energy/pollution quotas is ultimately the answer.

Prices will rise dramatically before anything serious is done about energy security in this country. But sure, we've loadsa money. We'll moan about the bill but we'll stump up.

Point 5) It is virtually impossible for ordinary citizens to capture local energy (wind/wave/solar/geo) because of the extortionate cost of private installations and even if you have that sort of money, most system can never pay for themselves; net metering is essential as is a system of grants/loans/expertise and back up.

If they're going to sell the ESB, then the money received should go back to householders - the ones who own it - in the form of grants for renewable energy or community-owned generation.

__________________
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when creating them

Interesting stuff found on Feasta's board:

copyright Roger Adair

__________________
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when creating them

Greener energy mix to follow EU-inspired rule shake-up
Good to see Europe pulling us, kicking and screaming, in the right direction on Energy Security.

The most important line being the Government's realisation that "... we're at the end of that pipeline."

__________________
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." Mark Twain

“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoléon Bonaparte

Quite a lot of discussion on energy this week in the media, particularly after the release of the Forfas Report A Baseline Assessment of Ireland's Oil Dependence.

Many in the media lost their knickers because the report points out that Nuclear Power might have a role to play. Instead of evaluating the alternatives, looking at the options we have available to us, and drawing out the possibilities different approaches can make, some of Ireland's best known Journalists and Broadcasters, from Miriam O'Callaghan to Matt Cooper to Pat Kenny all jumped to the conclusion that Nuclear is a viable alternatives, and adopted a patronising attitude to anyone putting forward a different reality.

They didn't put forward any rationale for their positions, didn't point to any credible source for their position, and completely ignored the stated positions of Government Ministers, Senior Civil Servants with a role in the area, and many people in the Energy Industry.

Somebody is feeding them a line, they are accepting the line uncritically, and they are dismissing the credible positions of a whole range of informed people in a patronising way because they appear to think that they know more about the subject than we do.

The fact that the best they could do for "Experts" on the subject were McGuirkJ and Ricky Waghorne tells you a lot about the "other side" of the argument.



On Wednesday the Mansion House hosted an event entitled Energy Futures chaired by David McWilliams which went into great detail about Energy issues. The speakers included Colin Campbell of ASPO and Gerard O'Neill of Amarach Consulting who co-authored the Forfas report referred to above.



There have also been a couple of threads on Polly with related topics:
Ireland may need nuclear power- Forfás
At last - Eco Grants
They are slightly Troll infested, but are useful to note for reference.



Today's Tribune has a very good article on the subject from the perspective of energy in the home.

'We're not eco-warriors and I'm not hugging trees and we've knocked a third off our heating bills'



Matt Cooper continues his uninformed ranting on the topic in today's Sunday Times.

Doh, let’s ignore our need for nuclear power and it’ll go away

Personally, I think anyone who believes those growth predictions is naive in the extreme. They assume a business-as-usual scenario in relation to energy availability and energy prices.

I would also love to know who told him that "none of these will be enough if we are to reduce our dependence on oil" as it is patently untrue.

I don't know who Matt is taking his talking points from, but he is obviously very badly informed on a range of subjects!



In the Sunday Business Post we have a Grade A WingNut(tm) attack on the Forfas Report from a Peter Nolan, a member of the "Stockholm Network", and the Politics.ie Creche

Energy wasted on Forfas report
A fringe group of Geologists, my dear boy. People who have made their professions working in the Oil Industry - as opposed to someone who traded paper energy in the energy markets.

Interesting that he doesn't tell us which "experts", and while I can't be arsed fact checking his claims about the USGS, IEA and UN-IPCC, I can point to US's second biggest Oil Company - Chevron for support for Campbells analysis. Will You Join Us


Of course, the fact that the EU have TOLD Governments to start building stocks of Gas to cover a rainy day is conveniently ignored.

Much of the rest of the blather in the article has been frequently debunked on this Forum, so it can be left fester without further comment.

For those who want to know more about the Stockholm Network, here is a report on them from Corporate Watch

(Whoever thought that the motto "Never let a WingNut Lie go unchallenged" would be appropriate to a thread like this?)

__________________
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." Mark Twain

“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoléon Bonaparte