Sir, – David Robert Grimes calls for a fact-based and honest nuclear debate in Ireland ("We need to debate the nuclear option honestly", February 23rd). So he should begin by conceding that nuclear power currently supplies about 2.6 per cent of global energy demand, not 13 per cent as he claims. He confuses energy with electricity and is consequently out by a factor of five on a matter of strategic importance and central to informed debate. This error has been widely repeated regularly for over a decade across most UK media.
The article deliberately frames the debate in terms of (disputable) accident statistics, whereas proliferation and terrorism are much bigger core issues. The future global security and foreign policy downsides of deploying more nuclear power globally would be highly disproportionate to the small and optional climate-benefits of this ore-crushing energy source.
Dr Grimes talks about future “generation IV” (fast burner-breeder) reactors but such long-touted technology is two decades away from availability, even if ever technically or commercially proven at utility scale. Indeed, here in the UK, the public has been led by the nose on such future promises and widely repeated factual errors to accept unproven “generation III” pressurised water reactors. Such reactors would consume imports of limited uranium ores, when abundant indigenous renewable energy sources, from photovoltaic to floating offshore wind, will probably have lower costs by 2025, let alone 2050. – Yours, etc,
NEIL CRUMPTON,
Gwynedd,
Wales.
Sir, – Your "Energy Options for Ireland" series is commendable. However, the article "Nine ways to power Ireland" did not include bioenergy at all.
The only way we can even approach our 2020 renewable energy targets for heat and transport (combined they consume two-thirds of all energy) is with the extensive use of bioenergy, specifically biomass for heating and biogas for transport.
We are only likely to meet our 2020 renewables target in electricity. The Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources estimates each percentage shortfall from the 16 per cent overall national target may result in fines in the range of €100 million to €150 million – a total penalty of €500 million is quite possible, although the Government talks this down.
Ireland is well known for its wind energy potential. We also have enormous bioenergy resources, including biomass such as wood fuel products (logs, chip, pellets) and forestry processing residues.
Sources of renewable biogas include agricultural and food-processing residues, used vegetable oils, grass, energy crops from marginal lands and landfill gas.
The technology is well established to use biomass for heating and to generate biogas using anaerobic digestion. This renewable gas can be delivered to end-users via the gas grid. Biomass as a heating fuel costs far less per unit of energy delivered than oil-fired heating.
We in Ireland lag behind our EU neighbours because our Government has focused too much on wind energy as the main renewable option.
The Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources is working on a bioenergy plan. It should have emerged much sooner, but we hope new momentum will lead eventually to stimulation of the bioenergy sector, resulting in increased energy independence, a reduction in the enormous €6.7 billion annual energy import bill, major environmental benefits and the creation of thousands of jobs across the country. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL HEGARTY,
General Manager,
Irish Bioenergy Association,
Enterprise House,
O’Brien Road,
Carlow.
Sir, – "A short history of energy protest in Ireland" (February 24th) includes the toxic and municipal waste incinerator proposed for Cork harbour in 2001 and 2008 as contributing to energy production. These incinerators had nothing to do with generating energy.
At the oral planning hearing in 2010 it was clearly shown that these plants failed to pass the threshold for recognition as a waste-to-energy plant.
In continental Europe, where incinerators are linked to district heating systems, energy derived from incinerators to heat homes may make sense. The downside, however, is that this process releases more harmful pollutants into the atmosphere, due to the need to reduce the temperature to produce electricity.
“Waste-to energy” is how the waste industry now refers to incinerators, which are not a long-term, sustainable solution to energy production. – Yours, etc,
MARY O’LEARY,
Cobh,
Co Cork.
Sir, – We burn 7,000 tons of cheap American coal every single day in Moneypoint while trying to persuade communities that the best way to decarbonise is for them to live under wind turbines and pylons! Just another of the crazy contradictions in what passes for energy policy in this country.
Rural Ireland is becoming very aware that not only is wind energy incapable of reducing our CO2 emissions in any meaningful way but it is also unable to compete on the wholesale market without being propped up by subsidies paid for by consumers in their electricity bills. The paltry contribution of wind at 2.9 per cent of overall energy displays how limited this form of energy is, even without taking into account the need for permanent back-up energy sources.
There are many valid communityconcerns about noisy turbines, affected sleep, reduced property values, destroyed landscapes, displaced jobs and a host of other issues. Forcingpeople to live in an infrastructure which provides no benefit to our environment, our economy or our communities is not sustainable. – Yours, etc,
CAITRIONA CULLINANE,
Kilcormac,
Co Offaly.