a boyle
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
a boyleParticipant
@notjim wrote:
how about some dinosuars, they are actually pretty cheap because they are mostly plaster anyway. the nhm has a substantial undisplayed collections – don’t touch the nhm and have nmh II in the stack house.
i like that.
how curious that in the space of a lazy friday afternoon several viable ideas have been tossed up, by a set of people who have never met.
Considering the docklands people are specifically entrusted to develop the docklands , what a disapointing sham all around.
What is even more curious is that just today they have reported roughly 20 million euros of monies available to them .
This would go long way to
a public spa,
a second natural histroy museum,
a new headquarters for the chester beatty library,
a science museum,
(a transport museum ? )furthermore we can be pretty certain that this wedding list shop were given a big discount to woo them to the site and will no doubt close at the least sign of trouble. It is a pitty but this will cement the complete void that is the ifsc.
a boyleParticipantoh don’t get me wrong i was simply musing of possibilities. In general museums have garguantuan amounts of things in store.
In fact there is one museum that does only show a fraction of its collection : chester beatty.
All i was trying to get at was the need for an attraction.
Not sure about a science museum … they usually need a lot of space , and stack A has a rather low ceiling, but it is a good idea.
Has anybody been to the spas in iceland of hungary , stack A is perfect for such an amenity!
a boyleParticipanthaughey moved it
a boyleParticipantmark my words the abbey will never move to the docks.
firstly i think when people realise exactly what is being offered they will oppose it fiercely.
On top of that the liebskind theatre is going to be built soon .I think the business man behind it knows that if he can get his theatre built and offer it for free to the government they won’t be able to refuse.
Especially since the location of the abbey is entirely political, and let’s face it it is going to be a country man who runs the dail next year. and he won’t care about the north side.
finnally there is the cost. There will have to be a international competition and the building won’t be cheap (say 30 million).
This has happened before . Stack A was meant to be the modern art gallery but it didn’t happen.
What i could see happening is the peacock moving to the leibskind and the abbey redevelopped where it is. (using the original facade). The change would be that the peacock became the large theatre and the abbey the smaller one. but i just don’t see the docks being filled in.
a boyleParticipantthat is a bit of a waste meadows and byrne aren’t going to turn the ifsc around.
Although i understand the docklands people wanting to get something going, more commercial outfits is a waste.
There are ample art pieces held in the national gallery stores to turn this into a gallery. same goes for a museum, perhaps focussing on geogian dublin.
Personnaly i think it would make an inspiring public baths , with saunas in the arched basement. and swimming pools underneath the wonderfull roof.
The original idea for a whole series of restaurants was a good one but this won’t work.
the Ifsc needs a proper attraction to get it off it’s feet.
a boyleParticipant@Maud wrote:
It looks a bit miserable to me. It’s out in the countryside and yet it looks really corporate and grey as if it belongs in a city.
Maybe it’s just the photos though. When I heard about it first(my Dad described it to me!) I thought it sounded so exciting.
Are you gonna shoot me now?!
no but go take a look at it , photos don’t do it justice.
a boyleParticipantnot really even if there was to be fission comercially ready in a few years it would take a few decades to realistically test and refine the construction of such a such a process.
we already have no control over our enery source , which means we have no control over our economic future at all . A war , any war would tumble us into recesion , becasuse we would simply have to start turning things off.
what happens if and when there is a major pipeline destroyed through a terrorist bomb, and the price of petro triples for a few months . do you think people will be so anti nuclear then ?
for now we could get by radically changing our whole approach to taxing cars … but that is not going to happen.
a boyleParticipantperhaps the site is split into different parts ?
a boyleParticipant@Morlan wrote:
Boyler, if you’re down there again ask one of the builders what they’re doing. It’s possible that they are just excavating the whole site in preperation for the new developments.
i ‘ll consider it. i don’t think the local natives are particularly gratefull for every tom dick and harry going by to have a look, and these natives are particularly mobile , and. … … …
a boyleParticipant@StephenC wrote:
However the point still remaijns that Luas down from the Green to O’Connell St via Pearse would be too long a journey.
yes but i don’t think it will be significantly longer than the shorter route. there are so many pedestrian routes along the way that the trams are likely to have to go no faster than 10km/h between starting and stopping , whereas using the other direction could see them going at 30/40km/h on average.
This effect will really kick in if the trams start running every three minutes or two. the shorter route is a case of the shortest route being the longest way round !!!
a boyleParticipant@StephenC wrote:
Duplication of the Luas and Metro lines is of course a valid point although many city transit systems have duplication. Its by no means a bad thing. I think people will be taking Metro and Luas from St Stephens Green for differing reasons.
that may well be but with whole chunks of the city with no services i would think the last thing we need is duplicating things!!!
yes you are right to be concerned about the fact that trinity own half the street , but your concern is misplaced. They current want to redevelop the street , and they need the money . a luas on pearse street would provide irresistable impetus for change. consider the value of redevelopping the street to trinity , hundreds of millions that could go to new facilities!
a boyleParticipanti was down there a week ago. they are busy digging like mad . in light of the papers i have no idea what they are doing.
a boyleParticipanto’connell bridge is hugely underused, half the lanes on it serve no purpose whatsoever. and only duplicate access provided on butt bridge.
sending the luas behind trinity might be a political non runner and so i fear we could get bogged down in a pointless argument here…
behind trinity is the superior routing for various reasons; namely the likely routing in front of trinity:
1 it gets in the way of buses which carry more poeple (several times more people).
2 it doesnt add any extra benefit to what is in place . those seeking acces to the area south of the liffey won’t get there any fast by using this extension . because of all the stopping and starting enevitable with the depestrian crossings the tram will go at walking speed between the green and oconnel street. (possibly slower)
3. With a serious lack of shopping , the routing behind trinity opens up the long term possibility of the whole of pearse street being rejuvenated . — . we have all seen the effect of the red line on arnotts , who are preparing an enormous expansion. the same would happen on pearse street. thus the green line could service two areas instead of one — surely that is a good thing. Trinity have already showns signs that they are of a mind to return their holdings to retail.
4. running behind trinity means not duplicating the metro routing.a boyleParticipant@StephenC wrote:
And the same could be done to the eastern side of the street where again a wider pavement could be provided and much of the clutter (such as the ridiculously placed telephone kiosk) could be removed. I fancy the DCC have as much in mind for the future redevelopment of the Bridge, they’re just waiting for the final decision on the Luas rerouting.
Personally, sending Luas down O’Connell Street will just add to all these problems and destroy much of the good work already done there. Marlborogh Street is a much better option.
definitely . but do you fancy a new bridge acrross the liffey ?? o’connell bridge seems completely underused to me. if it is to go around the back of trinity , it could simply head straigh up d’olier street . (a good idea to my mind — it will only be fractionally slower , due to the large number of pedestrian crossings on dawson , grafton, and westmoreland street)
a boyleParticipant@lostexpectation wrote:
so they are looking for people to design a tower while they keep showing us pictures of tower that hasn’t been designed yet?
This has me completely confused … they are currently digging the foundations for the tower . Does anybody know what is going on ?
a boyleParticipant@Dg101 wrote:
While admittedly nuclear fusion does require fuel, deuterium, which is one of the two fuels needed is available in water. And, we do seem to have quite a bit of that. Lithium is the other fuel, which is more of a concern, but estimates indicate that we have more than sufficient quantities to make fusion viable for the foreseeable future. And, waste from fusion is minimal, with only the reactor itself becoming highly radioactive, and that can be recycled after a period of roughly a century. So, yes, it is sustainable.
yes fusion is sustainable , but to my knowledge there is no working reactor anywhere that works on fusion. It is still a completely theoretical creation , that has only been achieved in laboratories.
Is it not time we realised that there is nothing we can do that is sustainable ?? . is it not time to realise that anyone who tells you there are no side effects , is either grossely naive , or plain straight lying ?
even windmills are of dubious sustainability , requiring mounds and mounds of concrete , which itself require the releasing of heaps of co2.
fission (curren nuclear stuff) is a way forward
a boyleParticipantthat might work lostexpectation but i think there is a simpler more effective solution..
on the bridge side (west junction) there is now a an unused traffic lane which could be filled in and given over to pedestrians.
on the street side (west junction) there is a bit of a jumble that has built up over time. There is a loading bay , a left turn lane which is out of sync with the other lanes.
By synscronising the left turn (onto oconnell street from bachelors walk) with the go straight and turn right options , you remove the need for a left turn lane at all. It might be possible to fill this in too .
Certainly the loading bay could be removed on bachelors walk and placed on o’connell street (with much shorter delivery times — akin to grafton street). Then move the white line some fifteen feet back .
a boyleParticipantwhile i have been blatently stirring things up out of summer boredom in the last week , on this topic i am not.
First off nuclear fuel is like petroluem ,it comes in a whole variety of types. Some do have relatively short half lives. France does manage it’s waste on hundred year rotation.
Chernobyl was a tremendous disaster , but so are trabant cars. They make skodas look plush.
Petrol kills ten of thousands year on year through polution.
Regarding sustainability. please whoever thought of this forget about it!!! human have never done a single thing that is sustainable. We will never be in a position to do anything sustainable.
My basic point is that when petrol cars were first developed they were incredibly dangerous initially. So it is with nuclear. Scientists have learnt from their mistakes. This technology is safe. It can work.
We don’t need it now or even in the short term. But we have to get our heads around it in the end. We have to make it work.
I now that lots died in chernobyl (although a team of eminent scientists from the UN , with no axe to grind, said this is wrong. They resoundedly confirmed that not more than a few thousand died, and a relatively small area was significantly damaged.)
We need to grasp the nettle and get out of our ivory towers.
a boyleParticipantit looks to me like the money has run out .
a boyleParticipantthis building looks fantastic. None of the photos do it any justice because there is not one angle that captures it.
In person it looks a great, on a par with busaras, no question
-
AuthorPosts