Ireland Ranks near bottom of Renewable Targets Table

 Wind Energy Oriented Renewable Plans Fared Badly

Ireland just about reached it's 2020 renewable target of 16% equalling Poland, a country not exactly renowned for its love of the "green religion". Ireland ranked 20th out of the 27th member states. Only Belgium, Luxembourg, Malta, Holland and Hungary ranked lower.

So the question must be asked - where did Ireland go wrong after spending billions on renewable energy and building 5,000MW of wind farms ? 

Surely if wind speeds are so high in Ireland as we are often told, then Ireland should be in the top 10 of Europe ? 

Sweden, Croatia, Finland, Bulgaria, Latvia and Austria topped the list of renewable energy performers in the EU.

Here are the main sources of renewable energy for each country :

Sweden - hydro, biomass. Exports a lot of electricity to Finland.

Croatia - hydro with some wind and solar. Imports a lot of electricity.

Bulgaria - hydro and solar. 

Finland - biomass and hydro. Imports a lot of electricity from Sweden and Russia.

Latvia - biomass and hydro.

Austria - biomass and hydro.

And for countries outside the EU - - 

Iceland - geothermal.

Norway - hydro. Norway has 65 times as much hydro as wind.

This clearly shows that the most successful renewables are Hydro and bioenergy/biomass. There are also significant benefits to interconnection especially if the neighbouring country has a lot of hydro. For instance, Denmark has a similar amount of wind energy to Ireland, but relies heavily on imports from hydro based electricity in Norway and Sweden which means wind has to do a lot less heavy lifting than in Ireland (because imported electricity is emission free). Denmark ranks in the top 10 of the EU renewable energy targets table for this reason.

It looks like Ireland backed the wrong horse with wind energy.  However, based on past performance, it is unlikely that Ireland will put the brakes on and assess the situation.

Switzerland and Sweden Used as Models for Irish Carbon Tax

A Benchmark for the Carbon Tax, no Benchmark for cheap electricity  

As part of a comprehensive policy package, carbon taxes will have a central role in guiding the energy transition by providing the economic incentive to switch from high-carbon to low- or zero-carbon technologies and products. In Ireland, the Climate Change Advisory Council has recommended a phased increase in the carbon tax from the current €20 per tonne to €80 per tonne by 2030. In terms of benchmarking, it is worth noting that some countries already have carbon taxes at the upper end or even in excess of this range, with the Swedish carbon tax currently at $139 (e112) and Switzerland at $101 (e81).

The Central Bank have now thrown their weight behind the sudden political push for an increase of the carbon tax in Ireland. Their recent report about climate change and it's alleged impacts on the economy fail to address the issue of the unsustainable levels of government and private debt in Ireland, which allow us to live far beyond our means and consume resources at a far greater rate than previous generations. There is no mention of unsustainable government spending and the bloated welfare state (The cost for a new hospital in Dublin has risen from €400m to nearly €2bn, welfare spending still stands at €20bn despite lowest unemployment for over a decade).

The Central Bank fails to understand that emissions are coupled with economic growth so that if climate change were really having an impact on the economy, we would be seeing economic decline right now, followed by a consequent reduction in emissions. They make the observation that 1991-2016 temperatures were higher than the period for 1960-1990, which actually supports the natural cyclical theory of climate change rather than the man made theory.  They also claim that insurance payouts due to extreme weather events are up. The 1940s were perhaps the worst decade for flooding and crop devastation in recent history but I can find no evidence that there were any insurance payouts at all. But I want to focus on one particular part of their report, the carbon tax. 

The purpose of the Central Bank presentation on climate change appears to be to groom Irish people for more taxes, specifically carbon taxes. 

They present Sweden and Switzerland as models for Ireland to follow in this regard.  What they fail to state is that Sweden has electricity prices at least 25% less than Ireland. But more importantly, Switzerland, which has a carbon tax equal to that proposed by Irish politicians, has had one of the lowest electricity prices in the world for many years, roughly half that of Ireland, which now ranks as one of the most expensive countries for electricity in the world.  Switzerland generates most of it's electricity from hydro and nuclear (as does Sweden). How is it that Ireland's indigenous wind industry cannot compete with Swiss hydro, an indigenous renewable source that does not lead to high Swiss electricity bills ?

The examples of Sweden and Switzerland actually undermine the central banks case for more carbon taxes in Ireland as it shows that we are already paying comparatively much higher for energy. A carbon tax similar to what was introduced into these countries could make Ireland the most uncompetitive country in the world for energy with actual knock on impacts for our economy far worse than "climate change". 

One could have perhaps made a better case for the carbon tax if wind energy had led to the cheap energy revolution that Irish people were promised.  But as we all know that never materialized.

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/DDN-20180807-1

Is Ireland Becoming Wetter ?

In 2013, the Irish media reported that "ongoing climate change will make Ireland wetter over the coming decades". This claim has persisted ever since climate hysteria took root here.  I took a sample of seven weather stations from different areas of the country to test the claim. In every single one, 2016 and 2017 had less rainfall than 2015. Only two showed more rainfall in 2017 Vs 2016. The other five showed declining rainfall levels over the past two years. 

To further investigate this trend of lower rainfall levels, I checked a completely different source - hydro power. Years with high rainfall should coincide with years that had high hydro power output and vice versa.  I obtained hydro power data from SEAI from 2008 to 2016. 2008 and 2009 were high points for hydro that have not been matched since. Since then, hydro power has varied but there is a clear overall decline.

The fall in rainfall during 2016 vs 2015 can also be seen corroborating the above weather stations.