Cambon

2 hours ago, Happier diner said:

The usual method is via a network of cables. 

No! By smart meters. Doesn’t Matter where it came from. Charged on usage. 

5 hours ago, The Phantom said:

Where's that?  I thought they just craned and placed them from the barges that were sat off the runway. 

If from 26, you walk out around the end of the runway extension, as the path starts to turn left back up the hill towards Balthane, the ramp to water level is dead ahead of you. The crane was driven down it to the sea, then the rocks were loaded onto lorries and driven up the ramp. The ramp is still there. 

39 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

It's to make them turn on the days when there is no wind 🤭

Or, blow the fog away from the airport so planes can land on foggy days. 

15 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

Ah, but we are world-leading experts on port construction now...we could also import a load of Norwegian rock if necessary.

A temporary ramp was built for the Norwegian rock. It is still there, and deep enough for the boat from Norway, which must have been pretty low in the water. 

1 minute ago, Ringy Rose said:

Licensed premises didn’t reduce their prices for spirits last year when the standard shot size dropped from 28ml to 25ml. They kept the prices the same and just pocketed the 10%.

It would be the same with VAT. Anyone who claims that VAT reductions would be passed on to customers is either deluded or a liar. And the reduction in VAT income would have to be found from somewhere.

Exactly! That is what happened after Covid, when VAT was lowered to encourage people to go out. Some lowered their prices, others didn’t. I have never returned to any of those establishments that didn’t. When I asked, the minister, he said it was up to the establishment. 

30 minutes ago, NoTail said:

I think Asitis has a certain point. If 40m was user to provide free solar panels to all then the demand on the MUA would diminish substantially.  Reducing their revenue and hence ability to repay their debts. We would all find our standing charges increasing to 1,000 per quarter or something. 

I am all for the green initiative. I have suggested before that all newbuilds have PV that feeds into the grid. Minimal additional cost that will be recouped in a few years. However, we have a very stupid, waste government. Look at the Lord St flats, sat there. They could be sold to genuine first time buyers, for knock down prices. 
Earlier, J posted a link to IOM energy usage and carbon output. About a quarter of the carbon was produced by electricity generation. Half was home heating. Think abiut that for a minute. If you are cold, put in a sweater. We don’t live in a cold country. If in doubt, try it sometime! 

22 hours ago, Moghrey Mie said:

Taking stuff for re-use and recycling avoids it becoming 'rubbish'. 

I agree, but last time I was there, very little was allowed to be removed. The southern site workers must have great eBay accounts! 

44 minutes ago, Sign in said:

Where can I find the data out about how much energy we have been using over the last 10 or so years? It might be further back, but we're on the 59th page and I'll look if its been said, although it'll be later tonight.

This sight may be helpful.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Power-consumption-in-the-Isle-of-Man-shown-as-proportions-of-the-different-uses-In-2018_fig1_350546569

18 minutes ago, Anthony Ingham said:

What a load of crap.  Have you seen the results of the geological surveys done up there to determine the foundations required?

Do you think they would be more of less on the rock down south than the sand up north?

Yes. The rock up there is generally slate, which crack’s easily. It will have to be blasted and reinforced concrete used. That is after all the trees are felled, the peat and wildlife removed (or killed) and a large part of natural countryside lost forever all for the sake of money. Because, it will not do anything to help climate change, but will bankrupt the island.

The main problem these days is psychological bullying. When I was a kid, everyone was bullied to some extent. Pointless pecking order, as described above. When it was my turn to receive abuse, I got my revenge on the rugby field. These days, I have heard they play touch rugby. 

13 hours ago, Anthony Ingham said:

Do you really think that they haven’t looked at this, and that you have better knowledge than the people making the decision?

Why do you think they have gone for earystane rather than Jurby then, assuming they have access to all the same info you do?

Civil Service NIMBYs

12 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Installation? That's hardly on the scale of designing and building a power station FFS.

How deep does the concrete need to be. Design done. Get a grip man FFS. 

You really have no idea, do you? A 200 metre high “sail” requires far stronger footing than a 20 metre tall building. This is a sail that puts great stress on the footings from many directions. The structural engineering bill per windmill will be in the millions. That is before any of the thousands of tons of concrete, per windmill is even ordered. 
Tell me, why do you think Jurby is an inferior site? I am curious, as it was originally chosen as the best, by some distance. Some of the many reasons I have mentioned above. Scard cannot even link into Castletown because of the solar farm at Billown.

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

No. Totally different. Wind turbines, off the shelf. Simple to install. 

Power stations. Bespoke items. Complex design and construction.

Apples with pears. Some people in here do not understand risk. 

Rubbish! Installation is bespoke for each and every windmill. More Pink Ladies and Granny Smiths.

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

How do you know?

Because there is not the road infrastructure, sea/ landing infrastructure, electrical infrastructure, basically there are no positives for the Scard installation. In addition, from a wind perspective, Scard is only good for southerly and westerly winds. 

Jurby, which was selected as the best place years ago, is virtually on the coast, with good road infrastructure, it is a brown field site already flat and ready to go. Electrical infrastructure is there, but not great. However, it can link in with the proposed solar farm at Andreas, work that will have to be done anyway. Jurby is also good for wind from 3 of the 4 directions. Installation cost will be a fraction of the cost of Scard. It is actually a no brainer.

4 hours ago, GD4ELI said:

You don't seem rather bright though.

Says the Cornish Piskie! 

2 hours ago, Happier diner said:

I doubt it.

No. There are more stupid places. A lot more stupid. It might not be the best but I believe the MUA own the land so it has a head start. What makes you think its the worst?

Cost of installation will be more than the cost of the windmills. 

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

Do you think the UK give us renewable energy for free?

You could say this about a lot of things. That £40M for the asset would have to paid back to the UK one way or another. People don't build windmills for free and then send us the power without recouping the capital cost. Surely make sense to do our own especially when wind is something we have plenty of. You are being a little bit naïve

We have already paid towards the uks green ambitions by currency devaluation due to uk government borrowing to pay for the infrastructure and associated subsidies. 

Scard will cost £100 millions minimum. Completely ill thought out. The brown field site of Jurby, which has easy access to the sea for delivery, and good road access makes the most sense. The hills just south of Peel also make sense. But, Scard is possibly the most stupid place windmills could possibly be put. 
 

I am not against windmills. I am against stupidity and waste! 

47 minutes ago, emesde said:

It does seem ironic that when the brewery closed a pub and put a  covenant on it everyone wanted such action stopped. Perhaps they had it right and realised that there is not the demand for so many licenced places in an ever changing market. Even now I suspect that a few more establishments will close as there are too many chasing the same smaller amount of disposable income.The quality and value businesses will grow and there will be casualties for some others.

It is quite a good point, but on the other hand, if you go back 50-60 years, pubs were generally owned by the landlord, who ran it themselves, opening for a couple of hours at lunch time and a few hours in the evening as and when demand required. Overheads were minimal and the landlord could control the prices. 
Fast forward to now, and pubs are rented buildings, opening all hours and trying to be everything to everyone. It is simply not sustainable.  As I said elsewhere, pubs need to reinvent themselves and create a niche market for themselves. 

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

I agree it would be very expensive. Pointless? No. It would reduce water demand and that's a good thing. 

Why is reduced water demand a good thing? How would demand be reduced? Are you going to flush the toilet less? Drink less tea? Take less showers? 
Demand is on its way up due to the desired increase in population. However, there is no shortage of supply. 

3 hours ago, Anthony Ingham said:

Because it is not a sensible long term proposition for them to be running two completely different system.

The houses on our street have been here for decades.  If they just replace when they fail they could still have a guy coming down here to read a handful of meters in thirty years.  That is clearly not sustainable so you just accept a few years of phased crossover and replace everything by a certain date, then kill the old system.

It’s also far more efficient in terms of time, money and emissions to send a bloke down a street a couple of times over a couple of days than have him darting all over the island at random and potentially visiting the same street 15 times to do 15 houses.

There are at least a dozen different types of meters around at the moment. Some over 50 years old. There are also several different models of smart meter, depending on installation, demand, etc. There will always be multiple systems. 

1 hour ago, CallMeCurious said:

Brought in an outside contractor on a price therefore cheaper to buy and fit meters in bulk. 

One advantage of the smart meters is they can be remotely turned off by the supplier. Dead handy when there isn't enough supply to meet demand so you can keep the essential and the great and the good on.

This is the UK version (though its by area)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/electricity-supply-emergency-code

I'm sure the MUA must have something similar planned if everything goes to renewable.

I am sure MU do. However, it will never happen, UK or here. UK can buy in nuclear from EDF, or fire up gas turbines as a temporary measure. We can also buy in or fire up gas, especially when MU realise that they have been had over the windmills. 

2 hours ago, Anthony Ingham said:

So you think they are telling porkies?

”The meters that we have previously supplied have not been manufactured for several years and it is becoming increasingly difficult and costly to maintain these”

Why would it be easy to maintain something and add them to new build houses when the suppliers have stopped making them?  Obviously it makes sense to move everyone to the same system.

Why replace and bin perfectly good meters? Sure, replace when broken or in new installations, but what is happening is an incredible waste of resources and money, at a time when we are supposed to reduce, reuse and recycle. 

55 minutes ago, Banker said:

We should have water meters so everyone pays for what they actually use, imagine the outcry if they said electricity bills would be apportioned according to rateable value of house no matter how much or little you use.

Problem is, the majority of the cost is literally supplying the property. The standing charge would be huge and usage next to nothing. 
It would be a very expensive, pointless exercise. 

Heads need to roll. This waste is totally unacceptable. 

1 hour ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Really, how so?

It is basically advertising for a “Fall Guy “ !