IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Should Coal Replace Coal? Options for the Irish Electricity Market

Listed author(s):
  • SEÁN DIFFNEY

    (The Economic and Social Research Institute)

  • LAURA MALAGUZZI VALERI

    (The Economic and Social Research Institute)

  • DARRAGH WALSH

    (The Economic and Social Research Institute)

The Moneypoint coal plant is nearing the end of its useful life and will need to be replaced. For Moneypoint’s replacement, we consider different types of baseload technologies: coal plants with and without carbon capture, combined-cycle gas plants and a nuclear plant. This paper compares how the different types of plant are likely to affect the net costs of the Single Electricity Market under a number of fossil fuel and carbon price scenarios and highlights their effects on short-run prices, emissions and energy security. We find that none of the plants considered is optimal over the full range of fuel and carbon scenarios considered and examine the advantages and disadvantages of delaying the decision. We also discuss why the commissioning of a nuclear plant is unlikely in Ireland in the near future.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.esr.ie/vol%2043_4/x1%20Diffney%20PP.pdf
File Function: First version,2012
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Economic and Social Studies in its journal Economic and Social Review.

Volume (Year): 43 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Pages: 561-596

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eso:journl:v:43:y:2012:i:4:p:561-596
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.esr.ie

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. Newcomer, Adam & Apt, Jay, 2008. "Implications of generator siting for CO2 pipeline infrastructure," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 1776-1787, May.
  2. Troy, Niamh & Denny, Eleanor & O'Malley, Mark, 2010. "Base-load cycling on a system with significant wind penetration," MPRA Paper 34848, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  3. Rubin, Edward S. & Chen, Chao & Rao, Anand B., 2007. "Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4444-4454, September.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eso:journl:v:43:y:2012:i:4:p:561-596. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Martina Lawless)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.