|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Campaigners warn against calls for Moneypoint conversion to biomass national |
environment |
opinion/analysis
 Wednesday April 16, 2014 11:57 by Biofuelwatch - Biofuelwatch biofuelwatch at ymail dot com
 Having followed the partial conversion of Drax coal power station in the UK to biomass, we are dismayed to see calls across the Irish media for Moneypoint to be converted to biomass. Those calls follow ReThink Pylon's recent publication of a report by a UK consultancy which greenwashes Drax's experience. Running Moneypoint on biomass would require pellets made from around 7.2 million tonnes of wood a year – compared to a total annual wood production of some 2.7 million tonnes in Ireland. The only type of biomass that can be burned in such power stations is wood from slow growing trees (and not residues, which are too high in bark) – other feedstock corrodes the boilers. Such a conversion would almost certainly rely on pellets imported from Canada and the southern US. Both are regions where highly biodiverse and carbon rich forests are increasingly being clearcut to make pellets from Europe – a disaster for forests and bad news for the climate, too. |
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (3 of 3)
Jump To Comment: 3 2 1To clear things up, regarding my suggestion to convert Moneypoint, as well as the Peat burning power stations fro that matter to incinerators,.. I was assuming this would only be a short term solution,... and ONLY if these power stations can be made to burn municipal waste at least as cleanly as their original fuels.
As for your anti-nuclear hysteria,. this is completely irrational in the context of the current energy supply,.. firstly because modern nuclear is still by far and away the safest energy source relative to energy produced,.. and secondly because I would actually advocate the use of passive safe Molten Salt Fast Reactors,.. which are intrinsically safe as well as eliminating the long term waste issue,.. unlike the thermal spectrum Pressurized Water Reactors currently used to produce nuclear energy.
Ruining the clean air and leaving a legacy of respiratory problems for growing Irish children with an incinerator or advocating nuclear power after the calamity that was Fukushima made parts of Japan uninhabitable. Is there any environmentally destructive short term highly profitable for a few, highly stupid idea you won't back Andy? Whatever the "industry" are paying you, it is not enough!
We are merely stewards of the environment for future generations. It belongs to and is shared by everyone. We should not listen to people who wish sell it out for a quick buck for a few well placed individual investors and those whose palms will be greased in the process
How about instead of converting moneypoint to biomass which we still have to buy, we instead convert it into an incinerator and get paid by other countries that still do landfill to take the waste off their hands in addition to the profit gained by generating electricity.
Assuming it's incinerated properly, there should be only mineral ash(no toxic organics) remaining, which could then be disposed of safely in the deep ocean, possibly through a pipe that descends from the ship through the thermocline,. thus eliminating any significant biological uptake.
Of course another major energy source Ireland would do well to consider is nuclear,.. especially passive safe Molten Salt Fast Reactors when the become available,.. as they hold the very real possibility of generating ultra cheap energy, cleanly and safely.