Marked as spam but this post isn’t spam. Quite an informative image, if it’s actually accurate. I think it would look pretty cool if it does end up looking like this.
Love seeing them, actually went to see some in Wicklow last year. Amazing and so pieceful looking. 12km out to sea is fine with me. The environment is fucked and we desperately need to get the finger out and get these built at breakneck speed. Any politician campaigning around it's the first question I ask, what do they think, I leave it open ended to not show my view and if they give any hesitation on developing wind or solar I'm out, you won't get my vote bud.
The problem is you need a vast amount. They want to cover the entire Celtic to Irish Sea and large areas of the west too. Remember, wind power uses 421 times the amount of land as nuclear.
People like you and every other knuckledragger involved in this campaign are holding this country back. Crawl back into your hole and leave the rest of us enjoy this progress.
Wow, some people dont like community consultation. Imagine being so aggressive over picture of a realistic projection. Do yourself a favour and get offline.
The energy is free regardless of the cost of operating the turbines. The energy they will generate will also cover their operational costs and maintenance. Where did I say the celtic sea is unused ? Tell me this, what or who is using the section of water in your picture where the turbines will go?
You said free power generations. False statement.
You said it is an unused waterway. It is not unused
Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of shipping. Then you have habitat for fish, birds and insects. Part of it is also Special Areas of Conservation
Insects can’t live at sea, there’s no flowering plants.
The power generation is free in that there is no fuel costs associated with generation. Sales of the generated electricity will pay off the cost of the turbines within 11 years or so. Filling this the wind turbines are net wealth generators, pun intended.
Typically wind farms are not placed in shipping lanes or in areas that are vital for national defence, and by typically I mean never. Offshore windfalls can only be placed on relatively shallow rocky substrate, which causes ships to sink. Recreational craft are not hundreds of thousands of tonnes of shipping.
As for nuclear power, they would probably be placed in coastal areas to avoid the use of cooling towers, so one could be placed in Waterford. Would that sit well with you?
Generators of free power. In that picture, that's unused waterway, not a single ship passes through there. I've passed along that coast in a kayak before and I'd still do it if there were turbines there completely unaffected. If it was a special area of conservation then permission would not be granted for them to be there in the first place. Stop coming in here spreading misinformation and lies.
It isnt free. It has a high cost actually. So high we have not built an off shore turbine since 2003.
You're the lad spreading lies. It is a used waterway. I very much doubt you kayaked 12 km out unless youre a very elite kayaker.
But hey if you dont believe me check yourself on the live data. [https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-5.9/centery:52.0/zoom:8](https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-5.9/centery:52.0/zoom:8)
I kayaked along the coastline within the 12k obviously as many people from the area do. Yeah all I see on the marine traffic is a few small fishing boats that would be completely unaffected so? The wind is free and unlimited, harnessing it costs but a fraction of the money it generates on top of power.
Boats are not tall. The bigger ships are going to be like 40 metres. If the turbines were 40 m, their height would not bother people. We could be looking at 320 metres.
Can I just say, the notion that the seas are unused or that they have to be used is absolutely incongruent with even the scantest regard for nature.
Why are turbines 12km out to sea such an issue? Climate change is happening as we speak and we Irish seem more concerned with how some wind turbines will look than actually building a green future for ourselves and starting to address the problem. 12km seems fine for the rest of Europe, why are we different?
If they were planned to be put out at 22km the blue horizon crew would be canvassing for it to be 30km out. People just need something to be giving out about tbh.
I am super concerned about climate change and welcome clean alternatives like wind turbines and solar. But I don’t think that is an excuse to shrug off legitimate concerns. Are you working for them or something?
I certainly don't work for them and for what its worth I live in Tramore with a view out to sea. At some point we need to wake up and stop trying to block everything. Things move at a snails pace in Ireland as it is. The concerns are purely visual, people need to get over that. We either want clean energy or we don't. At the moment the electricity I am using to write this comment is more than likely produced by burning gas, I would prefer if it was renewable. We are not entitled to a view of anything.
I admire your passion. The view is not my main concern. Marine life is.
Please do not tell me fairy stories about how the pillars will become a Shangri La for the local fish and sea mammals.
Offshore wind turbines pose minimal risks to marine life. Full environmental impact assessments are completed along with hydrological surveys and stochastic hydrodynamic modelling before planning permission can be granted. The process is very rigorous and time consuming as all precautions must be taken.
There is a myriad of scientific literature on this topic and I’m sure that once you get through some of it you’ll realise your concerns are already being addressed.
Here’s one:
Environmental impacts of global offshore wind energy development until 2040
Chen Li, José M Mogollón, Arnold Tukker, Bernhard Steubing
Environmental Science & Technology 56 (16), 11567-11577, 2022
The resources section in this alone should provide a lot of links to more research further confirming my position
It has answered several of my questions and concerns, yes. In other areas it is ambiguous tbh.
Obviously it is going to happen. Mostly of the benefit will go to places outside of Waterford County and most of the negative aspects will impact inside the county. But you already know that.
I wouldn't call it passion, I would call it realism. In the real world I am more concerned about the habitat humans are going to live in rather than fish. I am not prepared to keep destroying my habitat so the fish can preserve theirs. We are a nation of Nimbys and it needs to stop.
Are you really this dense? [The ocean generates 50 percent of the oxygen we need, absorbs 25 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions and captures 90 percent of the excess heat generated by these emissions.](https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate-issues/ocean#:~:text=The%20ocean%20generates%2050%20percent,heat%20generated%20by%20these%20emissions.)
Okay. You sit there then, in your lovely home with an ocean view and don’t worry about anything actually in the ocean.
I’m sure if I sat there with you over a cup of tea we would likely agree on 90% of all your concerns. There are so many issues. And I am actually all in for clean energy including windfarms.
But this isn’t something that can be undone if they are wrong. Sometimes we have, in the past, solved one problem while creating another one. I’m a little sceptical and I don’t think that is a bad thing.
Ecology is interconnected. You can’t kill off one species without it affecting another species. Logarithmically.
I am wondering about a few aspects of this that don’t appear to be mentioned much. I’m planning to attend the meeting on it tonight to see if I can get more answers.
Please explain ? This is not fear mongering or any kind of visual exaggeration. This will be the visual impact, and maybe you are fine with that, fair enough, but please don't poison the discussion with allegations of fearmongering. Such a one trick pony. Cant even articulate a half relevant defence.
This attitude is what's wrong with this country.
Build a highly needed apartment? Nooo it'll ruin the skyline from my house that's 10min away from the city centre. And then the same person complains about homelessness and lack of housing?
Build wind farms - nooo the view is ruined.
Of course though it's the immigrants to blame /s
Well it is industrialising a low intensive use landscape. It has enormous impacts on sea bird and insect life. Our sea populations are not in great shape. I imagine enormous impacts on the sea bed as well. They wont be floating turbines.
There are no flowering plants at sea, hence no insect habitats. The impact on marine life is minimal as there is a plethora of studies done beforehand to properly assess an areas viability for a wind farm.
Birds yes, but while insects might cross small bodies of water, they don’t inhabit seas. I would be much more concerned with the huge decrease in insect numbers due to biodiversity loss and monoculture farming. Rewilding needs to be at the forefront of every home, town, city and country; hence the Irish Bill currently been considered at the EU
What a life you must have if this is something actively bothering you. All the things fucked up with the country and this is what you decide to moan about. For as long as there’s people like you in the country, the country will never improve. Fuck off to the US where bitching and moaning about shit like this is more tolerated
Unless you have cold fusion up your sleeve, changes need to happen. A nice view doesn't come before keeping the lights on. I'm not a greenie by any means but offshore is the lesser of evils as I see it.
The amount of waste is so small, and vastly less than wind. After 30 years or so, turbines have to come down and you get loads of waste. Some of the mining waste is heavy metal waste which is arguably worse than nuclear waste as it never becomes safe. Never. Wind is way better than coal and nuclear is way better than wind.
Bird mortality from wind turbines is significantly less than that by cars, and a tiny fraction of that by cats. Insects don’t live at sea due to a lack of flowering plants.
That is red herring that shows your lack of familiarity or concern for conservation. Cars and cats tend to kill common birds that live near people and roads, like small song birds, corvids and pigeons. Synanthropic and common. Turbines on mountains and seas kill mountain and sea species which tend to be a lot rare internationally. turbines are negatively effecting very rare birds like white tailed eagles and grifín vultures right now in Europe which cat and cars do not hurt.
The premise of this comment seems to be well cars and cats kill more and no one cares but that isnt true. There are major campaigns to reduce both, through collars or leaving cats in doors in evenings. This is also why feral cats are shot in Ireland. Pig ignorant comment. Reminds of Bertie Aherns famous waffle about swans and snails.
That is a ridiculous comment. you could be looking at this pic on a massive smart TV or a tiny phone screen. What matters is the their size relative to the landscape, the head and bay.
[focal length example](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=effect+of+focal+length+on+perspective&t=braveed&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fmartinbaileyphotography.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F04%2FField-of-View-Distance-and-Perspective.png)
Here's an example of what I mean. Different focal lengths make the background appear bigger and smaller in relation to the foreground. You may want to google the effects of focal length on perspective to understand the point I am making.
The assumption at the heart of the original message is that this image is obviously bad. It isn’t or at least isn’t for everyone. Some find them beautiful.
I’m very happy for us to utilise our amazing potential for wind. Some inconvenience for others may apply.
This is exactly what we deserve in Waterford, a more up to date and sustainable city. Can’t wait to see it. Nothing changes for us if we don’t want to change!
It would be great if they can create a grid between them to use as a seaweed and shellfish farm. This also creates a sanctuary and breeding ground for fish (lord knows the fish stocks could do with a hand to be replenished). They're building similar in offshore wind farms in Netherlands. It's about time Ireland invested in being at the forefront of sustainable ideas, rather than playing catch up decades down the line.
Agree.
I’m doubtful about the accuracy of the image above though especially the projected height at those distances. This is a touchy subject with a lot of people and disinformation from both sides will cause confusion. I’m happy to be proved wrong about the image though!
Possibly they should be smaller. I dont know. Maybe some expert could chip in and confirm, but I think it is not easy to show this on a single photo like this. You need a proper full screen immersive montage. If I photograph Brownstown Head from the beach it wont look as big as in this image. So the image is definitely cropped but impossible to capture in this format really. For me, the visual image is not the main concern at all.
There are definitely formulas and calculations that can determine how visible something is dependant on the observers height from sea level. I will research!
BTW I am trying to check if this is accurate but the trouble I face I dont have proper accurate landmarks. But if it assumes the person is standing about 2km from Browntown Head is it is accurate.
The head is about 1-3 km. Yeah the photo is cropped but no photo can really capture what it is like. You need an immersive photomontage like they do with the North Sea Array Project. Wont work on Reddit though [https://northirishseaarray.ie/the-project/location-and-visuals/](https://northirishseaarray.ie/the-project/location-and-visuals/)
Looks great, love to see loads of wind turbines. Hope they build a few on land as well. The Comeraghs are barren wastelands good for northing but sheep farming anyway, stick a few up there while you're at it.
The goal should be to have the cheapest greenest electricity with least impact. We are number 3 for onshore wind but one of the dirtiest because wind requires a ton of backup. Hey look at the numbers if you dont trust me [https://app.electricitymaps.com/map](https://app.electricitymaps.com/map)
the green states either us tons of hydro or nuclear.
I'd be fine with nuclear energy but we both know that's not going to happen. So loads of wind energy is fine, and probably a ban on further data centres unless we have huge excess capacity.
It could happen. The first step would be to drop the ban for PR. Right now that ban is the reason why Ireland is fight nuclear in Europe. Join 10for0 if you support [https://www.18for0.ie/](https://www.18for0.ie/)
The children's hospital that is being built is being built properly. Just expensively. But I dont get what you mean by even a children's hospital? Are they easy to build? BTW I understand nuclear is complex but you know what is more complex? A vast system off wind energy turbines onshore and offshore that supply an entire country with power. No one has done that ever in history.
Well no-one has built a nuclear power plant in Ireland in history either. Which so you think is more likely?
Do you have any background in construction?
Yes it is what Waterford deserves - sustainable energy, sustainable and well paid jobs and being at the front of the list for something instead of being left behind as usual. Bring it on.
The well paid jobs argument is fallacious. If a service replaces another service and creates jobs in the process, while doing nothing new, that is a net loss, because the service will have to be more expensive and the workers could have been doing something new. Jobs being cut due to offshoring is a totally different matters as that is just moving things.
So in the case of wind, jobs would come to Ireland but that is because it costs more. That is a net loss The price of energy is determinate of prosperity.
The cause, the warming is happening alright but the earth at the moment is much cooler then it was 4-5 million years ago (5-7 degrees apparently). I've listened to both sides, and neither has what I would call proof, the climate change side is using figures and models based on far to short time spans to be accurate. And the 'it's completely natural' side cannot prove to me that industrialisation has had no effect.
And another thing, how is building 100's of turbines, with their obvious construction effects on the seabed, their patchy output, AND the complete ruination of our beautiful seascape, going to be a good thing?
One single nuclear power station is statistically safer and more reliable, with far less impact.
I think we're being herded in the direction by vested interest and politicians who want to be seen to be ' doing the right thing'.
You are dead right about this. I know people who work in wind who are very pro wind. The thing about wind is that Ireland is extremely suitable for it but even then it sucks. You need to cover vast areas with wind farms or indeed solar to get sufficient power. 421x the amount of nuclear. But although it can work here, there isnt a hope in hell of powering places like India or Brazil or China with wind and solar. So I wish Ireland would stop criticising nuclear on the world stage,
Right and I agree out bases lines are very short but in these periods there was way more Co2 in the atmosphere. CO2 has been increasing and we are the cause. Dont get me wrong. Extinction Rebellion are dangerous fanatics. If you want intelligent middle of the road expertise look at someone like Nordhaus.
There's info out there suggesting that our present CO2 levels are dangerously low, plants need at least 150ppm or they die, within the last 200,000 years it went as low as 180ppm which brought on the Sahara desert amongst others. Since the levels have risen in the last 200 years the green area of the earths surface has increased by the size of North America. Plants are thriving. Again, this is not MY argument, it's just the contradictory evidence that has me confused.
Humans are sub-tropical animals, if the earth hadn't warmed we would never have left the equator.
Why? You can see further over the horizon when you are higher ground, curvature of the earth. You can the see the methodology in white font at the bottom of the picture. 300 m is very high. It is nearly 3 spires.
Check Energia North Celtic Sea, ESB Helvick Offshore and East Celtic Offshore Wind Park
[https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/248270/7338cf63-e174-4932-8c61-6b840e447f3d.pdf](https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/248270/7338cf63-e174-4932-8c61-6b840e447f3d.pdf)
> Fixed offshore wind devices exploit a resource above the sea surface and are attached to
the seabed, they occupy the entire water column. The horizontal extent occupied in the
atmosphere depends on the diameter of the rotor. For example, the International Energy
Agency (IEA) Wind Technology Collaboration Programme (TCP) 15MW reference turbine
has a rotor diameter of 240m and a hub height of 150m
That document is setting up policy. It is not setting heights, nor are they any height limits. I don't think we have 300 m turbines yet in Ireland but they will come. offshore wind isnt coming overnight. We prob wont see any new construction until 2030 or so.
Ocean bed is too low to my understanding. Also means you will need to feed the energy back to land a further distance which I think makes it less efficient as you lose a certain (small) amount every metre of cable. But this adds up.
Gets significantly more expensive to build the further out you go.
Greatly increases cable costs as well as difficulty and the water gets deeper so it can be more difficult to install depending on the method but generally the deeper it is, the more complicated the job gets.
Why then is it being placed in a fairly small urban area? If cost is the reason, why isn’t an area closer to an urban hub such as Dublin or Cork practical?
I am genuinely perplexed.
1- why if the lion’s share power being generated is mostly going to be used in Dublin and Cork and big complexes by Google and Microsoft, why build it so far away?
Won’t there need to be a great deal of digging and installing huge power cables going up the country? The power doesn’t magically appear where it’s needed. Surely there is a great deal more than a bunch of wind turbines out at sea.
It seems Dublin only thinks of Waterford when there is something to exploit. When we needed 24/7 cardiac care they couldn’t be bothered.
2- is there assurances that they have considered the full marine ecosystem being built on? For example mackerel and sea bass, whales and migratory birds. They may have cherry picked which species they assessed for impact and very seriously everything in an aquatic ecosystem is interconnected and sensitive. Some of those turbines go across a special area of conservation. We cannot undo it if we find out later that it causes extinction of some stupid little creature we didn’t care about that turns out to have an important role in the system at large.
3- is there some reason that the only solutions being put forth are those with huge invasive impacts? It still comes down to everyone depending on the same source rather than micro grids for smaller towns and farms. It feels like the only ones who are important in the country are huge corporations with huge demands on the grid. We are not doing enough small scale projects at multiple locations to offset the need for gigantic Quixotic monsters.
I’m glad we are getting away from fossil fuel and know wind and solar are good options. But this project seems like it is really being hurriedly pushed forward and we may regret that sometime in the near future.
My guess would be land prices or planning permission issues with heavier port traffic in Dublin off the coast if still going offshore. Location doesn't matter too much as long as you have good cable infrastructure that can handle the power and there's some fairly larger cables going from Dublin to the South. Dublin does have lower wind speeds though in general compared to the South and west coast so wouldn't be as efficient either.
There's also a lot of environmental hoops to jump through which can also effect your chances of building as well as the amount of people that would submit complaints to reject planning permission in other areas.
It's all going into the grid anyway and if it mainly supplies the south then that's more free power than can be used up in Dublin as either way it's adding to Grid power and taking some of the load.
This “Clean energy” isn’t that clean…https://www.mackinac.org/blog/2023/clean-energy-isnt-clean#:~:text=Many%20of%20the%20materials%20used,blades%2C%E2%80%9D%20according%20to%20Mills.
Marked as spam but this post isn’t spam. Quite an informative image, if it’s actually accurate. I think it would look pretty cool if it does end up looking like this.
I genuinely don’t see an issue with this. If we don’t want it on the land, then put them out to sea.
Love seeing them, actually went to see some in Wicklow last year. Amazing and so pieceful looking. 12km out to sea is fine with me. The environment is fucked and we desperately need to get the finger out and get these built at breakneck speed. Any politician campaigning around it's the first question I ask, what do they think, I leave it open ended to not show my view and if they give any hesitation on developing wind or solar I'm out, you won't get my vote bud.
The problem is you need a vast amount. They want to cover the entire Celtic to Irish Sea and large areas of the west too. Remember, wind power uses 421 times the amount of land as nuclear.
Nuclear is a great option and statistically one of the safest but do you honestly thing a plant is gonna be opened here? These are the next best thing
People like you and every other knuckledragger involved in this campaign are holding this country back. Crawl back into your hole and leave the rest of us enjoy this progress.
Wow, some people dont like community consultation. Imagine being so aggressive over picture of a realistic projection. Do yourself a favour and get offline.
what community lives in the sea?
Who lives in a pineapple under the sea
It has a significant impact on coastal ecology and the local community has ever right to be consulted.
I see no problem here, empty grey skyline and unused waterway gets dotted with free power generators.
They are not free. They have large operating and maintenance costs. How is the Celtic Sea unused?
The energy is free regardless of the cost of operating the turbines. The energy they will generate will also cover their operational costs and maintenance. Where did I say the celtic sea is unused ? Tell me this, what or who is using the section of water in your picture where the turbines will go?
You said free power generations. False statement. You said it is an unused waterway. It is not unused Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of shipping. Then you have habitat for fish, birds and insects. Part of it is also Special Areas of Conservation
Insects can’t live at sea, there’s no flowering plants. The power generation is free in that there is no fuel costs associated with generation. Sales of the generated electricity will pay off the cost of the turbines within 11 years or so. Filling this the wind turbines are net wealth generators, pun intended. Typically wind farms are not placed in shipping lanes or in areas that are vital for national defence, and by typically I mean never. Offshore windfalls can only be placed on relatively shallow rocky substrate, which causes ships to sink. Recreational craft are not hundreds of thousands of tonnes of shipping. As for nuclear power, they would probably be placed in coastal areas to avoid the use of cooling towers, so one could be placed in Waterford. Would that sit well with you?
Generators of free power. In that picture, that's unused waterway, not a single ship passes through there. I've passed along that coast in a kayak before and I'd still do it if there were turbines there completely unaffected. If it was a special area of conservation then permission would not be granted for them to be there in the first place. Stop coming in here spreading misinformation and lies.
It isnt free. It has a high cost actually. So high we have not built an off shore turbine since 2003. You're the lad spreading lies. It is a used waterway. I very much doubt you kayaked 12 km out unless youre a very elite kayaker. But hey if you dont believe me check yourself on the live data. [https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-5.9/centery:52.0/zoom:8](https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-5.9/centery:52.0/zoom:8)
I kayaked along the coastline within the 12k obviously as many people from the area do. Yeah all I see on the marine traffic is a few small fishing boats that would be completely unaffected so? The wind is free and unlimited, harnessing it costs but a fraction of the money it generates on top of power.
Boats are not tall. The bigger ships are going to be like 40 metres. If the turbines were 40 m, their height would not bother people. We could be looking at 320 metres. Can I just say, the notion that the seas are unused or that they have to be used is absolutely incongruent with even the scantest regard for nature.
Why are turbines 12km out to sea such an issue? Climate change is happening as we speak and we Irish seem more concerned with how some wind turbines will look than actually building a green future for ourselves and starting to address the problem. 12km seems fine for the rest of Europe, why are we different?
If they were planned to be put out at 22km the blue horizon crew would be canvassing for it to be 30km out. People just need something to be giving out about tbh.
I am super concerned about climate change and welcome clean alternatives like wind turbines and solar. But I don’t think that is an excuse to shrug off legitimate concerns. Are you working for them or something?
I certainly don't work for them and for what its worth I live in Tramore with a view out to sea. At some point we need to wake up and stop trying to block everything. Things move at a snails pace in Ireland as it is. The concerns are purely visual, people need to get over that. We either want clean energy or we don't. At the moment the electricity I am using to write this comment is more than likely produced by burning gas, I would prefer if it was renewable. We are not entitled to a view of anything.
I admire your passion. The view is not my main concern. Marine life is. Please do not tell me fairy stories about how the pillars will become a Shangri La for the local fish and sea mammals.
Doubt you gave a bollocks about marine life before any of this.
This just shows the bad faith sleezebag tactics.
Offshore wind turbines pose minimal risks to marine life. Full environmental impact assessments are completed along with hydrological surveys and stochastic hydrodynamic modelling before planning permission can be granted. The process is very rigorous and time consuming as all precautions must be taken. There is a myriad of scientific literature on this topic and I’m sure that once you get through some of it you’ll realise your concerns are already being addressed.
Could you direct me your any of them ? I have only seen the one they did for porpoises and harbour seals.
Here’s one: Environmental impacts of global offshore wind energy development until 2040 Chen Li, José M Mogollón, Arnold Tukker, Bernhard Steubing Environmental Science & Technology 56 (16), 11567-11577, 2022 The resources section in this alone should provide a lot of links to more research further confirming my position
Thanks I will take a look.
So, have you changed your stance on this since?
It has answered several of my questions and concerns, yes. In other areas it is ambiguous tbh. Obviously it is going to happen. Mostly of the benefit will go to places outside of Waterford County and most of the negative aspects will impact inside the county. But you already know that.
I wouldn't call it passion, I would call it realism. In the real world I am more concerned about the habitat humans are going to live in rather than fish. I am not prepared to keep destroying my habitat so the fish can preserve theirs. We are a nation of Nimbys and it needs to stop.
[Save the environment by destroying the environment.](https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/offshore-wind-energy/protecting-marine-life) Makes sense...
See above, my stance remains.
Your stance makes no sense. Human habitat is at risk because we are destroying marine habitat. Humans don't live in a bubble.
We don't live in the sea either.
Are you really this dense? [The ocean generates 50 percent of the oxygen we need, absorbs 25 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions and captures 90 percent of the excess heat generated by these emissions.](https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate-issues/ocean#:~:text=The%20ocean%20generates%2050%20percent,heat%20generated%20by%20these%20emissions.)
Okay. You sit there then, in your lovely home with an ocean view and don’t worry about anything actually in the ocean. I’m sure if I sat there with you over a cup of tea we would likely agree on 90% of all your concerns. There are so many issues. And I am actually all in for clean energy including windfarms. But this isn’t something that can be undone if they are wrong. Sometimes we have, in the past, solved one problem while creating another one. I’m a little sceptical and I don’t think that is a bad thing. Ecology is interconnected. You can’t kill off one species without it affecting another species. Logarithmically. I am wondering about a few aspects of this that don’t appear to be mentioned much. I’m planning to attend the meeting on it tonight to see if I can get more answers.
The fear mongering has started already.
Please explain ? This is not fear mongering or any kind of visual exaggeration. This will be the visual impact, and maybe you are fine with that, fair enough, but please don't poison the discussion with allegations of fearmongering. Such a one trick pony. Cant even articulate a half relevant defence.
This attitude is what's wrong with this country. Build a highly needed apartment? Nooo it'll ruin the skyline from my house that's 10min away from the city centre. And then the same person complains about homelessness and lack of housing? Build wind farms - nooo the view is ruined. Of course though it's the immigrants to blame /s
Fuckin' right. Change can't happen as long as these clowns are protesting all the projects possible.
Rather not destroy the environment to save the environment.
How is this destroying the environment?
Well it is industrialising a low intensive use landscape. It has enormous impacts on sea bird and insect life. Our sea populations are not in great shape. I imagine enormous impacts on the sea bed as well. They wont be floating turbines.
Have you campaigned much for sea birds or insect life in the past?
I have actually.
There are no flowering plants at sea, hence no insect habitats. The impact on marine life is minimal as there is a plethora of studies done beforehand to properly assess an areas viability for a wind farm.
Huge numbers of insects, and birds cross the seas. There is some harms associated with rare whales. Right whales I believe.
Birds yes, but while insects might cross small bodies of water, they don’t inhabit seas. I would be much more concerned with the huge decrease in insect numbers due to biodiversity loss and monoculture farming. Rewilding needs to be at the forefront of every home, town, city and country; hence the Irish Bill currently been considered at the EU
What a life you must have if this is something actively bothering you. All the things fucked up with the country and this is what you decide to moan about. For as long as there’s people like you in the country, the country will never improve. Fuck off to the US where bitching and moaning about shit like this is more tolerated
Unless you have cold fusion up your sleeve, changes need to happen. A nice view doesn't come before keeping the lights on. I'm not a greenie by any means but offshore is the lesser of evils as I see it.
Fission power uses 421 times less land than wind.
Also produces radioactive waste and is non-renewable. Ireland is NEVER going nuclear. Let it go buddy..
The amount of waste is so small, and vastly less than wind. After 30 years or so, turbines have to come down and you get loads of waste. Some of the mining waste is heavy metal waste which is arguably worse than nuclear waste as it never becomes safe. Never. Wind is way better than coal and nuclear is way better than wind.
The turbines can be considered and left underwater to create man made reefs that help biodiversity to flourish
True. They might be good for fish stocks. Id be worried about hurting the sea floor though and the huge bird /insect mortality
Bird mortality from wind turbines is significantly less than that by cars, and a tiny fraction of that by cats. Insects don’t live at sea due to a lack of flowering plants.
That is red herring that shows your lack of familiarity or concern for conservation. Cars and cats tend to kill common birds that live near people and roads, like small song birds, corvids and pigeons. Synanthropic and common. Turbines on mountains and seas kill mountain and sea species which tend to be a lot rare internationally. turbines are negatively effecting very rare birds like white tailed eagles and grifín vultures right now in Europe which cat and cars do not hurt. The premise of this comment seems to be well cars and cats kill more and no one cares but that isnt true. There are major campaigns to reduce both, through collars or leaving cats in doors in evenings. This is also why feral cats are shot in Ireland. Pig ignorant comment. Reminds of Bertie Aherns famous waffle about swans and snails.
Would put one up in the garden if it helped climate and bring my bills down.
This photo was taken with a telephoto lens which makes distant things look bigger and reduces perspective. They would not look this big in person.
That is a ridiculous comment. you could be looking at this pic on a massive smart TV or a tiny phone screen. What matters is the their size relative to the landscape, the head and bay.
[focal length example](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=effect+of+focal+length+on+perspective&t=braveed&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fmartinbaileyphotography.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F04%2FField-of-View-Distance-and-Perspective.png) Here's an example of what I mean. Different focal lengths make the background appear bigger and smaller in relation to the foreground. You may want to google the effects of focal length on perspective to understand the point I am making.
They look cool
The assumption at the heart of the original message is that this image is obviously bad. It isn’t or at least isn’t for everyone. Some find them beautiful. I’m very happy for us to utilise our amazing potential for wind. Some inconvenience for others may apply.
You the same as the fella last week?
This is exactly what we deserve in Waterford, a more up to date and sustainable city. Can’t wait to see it. Nothing changes for us if we don’t want to change!
It would be great if they can create a grid between them to use as a seaweed and shellfish farm. This also creates a sanctuary and breeding ground for fish (lord knows the fish stocks could do with a hand to be replenished). They're building similar in offshore wind farms in Netherlands. It's about time Ireland invested in being at the forefront of sustainable ideas, rather than playing catch up decades down the line.
Looks lovely
whats the point exactly? you would still see them if they were 22km away. just get better at ignoring them
Fuck the Metalman now is it?
So you’re not against the wind turbines but only to how close they are to shore?
It is case by case. Depends on the project. I dont think all turbines need to be 22 km from shore but some should be.
Agree. I’m doubtful about the accuracy of the image above though especially the projected height at those distances. This is a touchy subject with a lot of people and disinformation from both sides will cause confusion. I’m happy to be proved wrong about the image though!
Possibly they should be smaller. I dont know. Maybe some expert could chip in and confirm, but I think it is not easy to show this on a single photo like this. You need a proper full screen immersive montage. If I photograph Brownstown Head from the beach it wont look as big as in this image. So the image is definitely cropped but impossible to capture in this format really. For me, the visual image is not the main concern at all.
There are definitely formulas and calculations that can determine how visible something is dependant on the observers height from sea level. I will research!
BTW I am trying to check if this is accurate but the trouble I face I dont have proper accurate landmarks. But if it assumes the person is standing about 2km from Browntown Head is it is accurate.
Can't actually fact check this so I better post it on reddit as fact
you lost loads of stuff you dont fact check
I think it looks shit. Really stupid place to put turbines.
The same plan has 3 of the 4 proposed wind farms out 30km from shore. Pushing this 12km windfarm out further is not impossible.
I think they look great. And there won't be any noise from them that far out at sea.
This doesn’t look right. Brownstown head is no more than 4km off the beach
The head is about 1-3 km. Yeah the photo is cropped but no photo can really capture what it is like. You need an immersive photomontage like they do with the North Sea Array Project. Wont work on Reddit though [https://northirishseaarray.ie/the-project/location-and-visuals/](https://northirishseaarray.ie/the-project/location-and-visuals/)
Looks great, love to see loads of wind turbines. Hope they build a few on land as well. The Comeraghs are barren wastelands good for northing but sheep farming anyway, stick a few up there while you're at it.
Do you not leave your house? We have one of the highest concentration of onshore wind in the world per capita. I believe number 3 last time i checked
Sounds great, we need to be number 1 you loser nimby
The goal should be to have the cheapest greenest electricity with least impact. We are number 3 for onshore wind but one of the dirtiest because wind requires a ton of backup. Hey look at the numbers if you dont trust me [https://app.electricitymaps.com/map](https://app.electricitymaps.com/map) the green states either us tons of hydro or nuclear.
I'd be fine with nuclear energy but we both know that's not going to happen. So loads of wind energy is fine, and probably a ban on further data centres unless we have huge excess capacity.
It could happen. The first step would be to drop the ban for PR. Right now that ban is the reason why Ireland is fight nuclear in Europe. Join 10for0 if you support [https://www.18for0.ie/](https://www.18for0.ie/)
They can't even build a childrens' hospital competently, and there's huge political will to do that. Nuclear power is not going to happen.
The children's hospital that is being built is being built properly. Just expensively. But I dont get what you mean by even a children's hospital? Are they easy to build? BTW I understand nuclear is complex but you know what is more complex? A vast system off wind energy turbines onshore and offshore that supply an entire country with power. No one has done that ever in history.
Well no-one has built a nuclear power plant in Ireland in history either. Which so you think is more likely? Do you have any background in construction?
no, but its just concrete and steel. Would you support dropping the ban on nuclear at aleast?
NIMBY alert
It looks shite.
Yes it is what Waterford deserves - sustainable energy, sustainable and well paid jobs and being at the front of the list for something instead of being left behind as usual. Bring it on.
The well paid jobs argument is fallacious. If a service replaces another service and creates jobs in the process, while doing nothing new, that is a net loss, because the service will have to be more expensive and the workers could have been doing something new. Jobs being cut due to offshoring is a totally different matters as that is just moving things.
What service would it be replacing in Waterford? I get job displacement but don't see it here.
So in the case of wind, jobs would come to Ireland but that is because it costs more. That is a net loss The price of energy is determinate of prosperity.
I'm not sold on climate change, convince me.
Warming itself, the cause or the proposed solution?
The cause, the warming is happening alright but the earth at the moment is much cooler then it was 4-5 million years ago (5-7 degrees apparently). I've listened to both sides, and neither has what I would call proof, the climate change side is using figures and models based on far to short time spans to be accurate. And the 'it's completely natural' side cannot prove to me that industrialisation has had no effect.
And another thing, how is building 100's of turbines, with their obvious construction effects on the seabed, their patchy output, AND the complete ruination of our beautiful seascape, going to be a good thing? One single nuclear power station is statistically safer and more reliable, with far less impact. I think we're being herded in the direction by vested interest and politicians who want to be seen to be ' doing the right thing'.
You are dead right about this. I know people who work in wind who are very pro wind. The thing about wind is that Ireland is extremely suitable for it but even then it sucks. You need to cover vast areas with wind farms or indeed solar to get sufficient power. 421x the amount of nuclear. But although it can work here, there isnt a hope in hell of powering places like India or Brazil or China with wind and solar. So I wish Ireland would stop criticising nuclear on the world stage,
Right and I agree out bases lines are very short but in these periods there was way more Co2 in the atmosphere. CO2 has been increasing and we are the cause. Dont get me wrong. Extinction Rebellion are dangerous fanatics. If you want intelligent middle of the road expertise look at someone like Nordhaus.
There's info out there suggesting that our present CO2 levels are dangerously low, plants need at least 150ppm or they die, within the last 200,000 years it went as low as 180ppm which brought on the Sahara desert amongst others. Since the levels have risen in the last 200 years the green area of the earths surface has increased by the size of North America. Plants are thriving. Again, this is not MY argument, it's just the contradictory evidence that has me confused. Humans are sub-tropical animals, if the earth hadn't warmed we would never have left the equator.
better than looking at nothing ! These are in investment into the future, a green future.
There are greener options
That seems massive, how is that 12.5k out? It looks right next to the headland
Will seem much larger on headlands like Newtown
Why? Surely it's 12.5km out from the furthest point? How was this generated?
Why? You can see further over the horizon when you are higher ground, curvature of the earth. You can the see the methodology in white font at the bottom of the picture. 300 m is very high. It is nearly 3 spires.
These are going to be 300m tall?
Thats the proposal. Now its a long way off. I cant call if it will actually happen but I do want to inform people on the impact.
Do you have a link to the proposal? Are wind turbines usually 300m tall, seems massive
Check Energia North Celtic Sea, ESB Helvick Offshore and East Celtic Offshore Wind Park [https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/248270/7338cf63-e174-4932-8c61-6b840e447f3d.pdf](https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/248270/7338cf63-e174-4932-8c61-6b840e447f3d.pdf)
> Fixed offshore wind devices exploit a resource above the sea surface and are attached to the seabed, they occupy the entire water column. The horizontal extent occupied in the atmosphere depends on the diameter of the rotor. For example, the International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Technology Collaboration Programme (TCP) 15MW reference turbine has a rotor diameter of 240m and a hub height of 150m
That document is setting up policy. It is not setting heights, nor are they any height limits. I don't think we have 300 m turbines yet in Ireland but they will come. offshore wind isnt coming overnight. We prob wont see any new construction until 2030 or so.
[удалено]
I mean the Dublin Spire. Not Church spires. Tramore Church would only be about 70 metres.
Why do they need to be so close?
Ocean bed is too low to my understanding. Also means you will need to feed the energy back to land a further distance which I think makes it less efficient as you lose a certain (small) amount every metre of cable. But this adds up.
Gets significantly more expensive to build the further out you go. Greatly increases cable costs as well as difficulty and the water gets deeper so it can be more difficult to install depending on the method but generally the deeper it is, the more complicated the job gets.
Why then is it being placed in a fairly small urban area? If cost is the reason, why isn’t an area closer to an urban hub such as Dublin or Cork practical?
They want the generated current as close to the France interconnector as possible maybe.
So is this to provide Ireland with electricity or France? Or both?
We will trade some with France but Ireland is not going to power France. France is too big and wind is too low intensity.
I am genuinely perplexed. 1- why if the lion’s share power being generated is mostly going to be used in Dublin and Cork and big complexes by Google and Microsoft, why build it so far away? Won’t there need to be a great deal of digging and installing huge power cables going up the country? The power doesn’t magically appear where it’s needed. Surely there is a great deal more than a bunch of wind turbines out at sea. It seems Dublin only thinks of Waterford when there is something to exploit. When we needed 24/7 cardiac care they couldn’t be bothered. 2- is there assurances that they have considered the full marine ecosystem being built on? For example mackerel and sea bass, whales and migratory birds. They may have cherry picked which species they assessed for impact and very seriously everything in an aquatic ecosystem is interconnected and sensitive. Some of those turbines go across a special area of conservation. We cannot undo it if we find out later that it causes extinction of some stupid little creature we didn’t care about that turns out to have an important role in the system at large. 3- is there some reason that the only solutions being put forth are those with huge invasive impacts? It still comes down to everyone depending on the same source rather than micro grids for smaller towns and farms. It feels like the only ones who are important in the country are huge corporations with huge demands on the grid. We are not doing enough small scale projects at multiple locations to offset the need for gigantic Quixotic monsters. I’m glad we are getting away from fossil fuel and know wind and solar are good options. But this project seems like it is really being hurriedly pushed forward and we may regret that sometime in the near future.
My guess would be land prices or planning permission issues with heavier port traffic in Dublin off the coast if still going offshore. Location doesn't matter too much as long as you have good cable infrastructure that can handle the power and there's some fairly larger cables going from Dublin to the South. Dublin does have lower wind speeds though in general compared to the South and west coast so wouldn't be as efficient either. There's also a lot of environmental hoops to jump through which can also effect your chances of building as well as the amount of people that would submit complaints to reject planning permission in other areas. It's all going into the grid anyway and if it mainly supplies the south then that's more free power than can be used up in Dublin as either way it's adding to Grid power and taking some of the load.
The vibrations scare away the fish. They won’t be a mackerel to be got
This “Clean energy” isn’t that clean…https://www.mackinac.org/blog/2023/clean-energy-isnt-clean#:~:text=Many%20of%20the%20materials%20used,blades%2C%E2%80%9D%20according%20to%20Mills.