Author Topic: ultra low carbon agency for Ontario to change transportation emissions (35%)  (Read 18755 times)

Offline tpl

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 23908
  • Carma: +298/-675
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2022 Taos
Tonight hitting 1136 responses.  The Globe and Mail Readers are very angry.  Why is no one on our boards angry?
I don't think the modern equivalent of the mob with torches and pitchforks works any more...sadly.  The correct response would be a proper armed revolution but not enough of us have the guns,the training and the will.**  50 lbs of Semtex under the floor of the legislature would be a good start but you'd have to be prepared to take on the OPP and possibly the Canadian armed forces as the next step.

There is an argument that I have read that over 50% of the population benefit from government spending in places like Canada, UK, France etc.and are just as happy to ignore the whole thing and get on with their lives.     

** as one of the people with two passports and two citizenships I can always move if life became unbearable.  But then again at my age I can just hang in there.
The most radical revolutionary will become a conservative the day after the revolution.

Offline bye

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2598
  • Carma: +313/-518
  • member
    • View Profile
Well, considering the benefits to electric car ownership for Ontario are to use up the excess nuclear power we produce and sell at a loss every night, a million electric cars on the road is a good start.

http://mysmartelectricdrive.blogspot.ca/2014/03/choose-one-boil-steam-or-recharge.html

I show a graph demonstrating this.  Wouldn't you want to pay less for fuel, have that fuel produced and sold by your own province, having that money come back directly to the province and not to countries that hate us (oil producers), and never need to get that gas smell on your clothes again?   Electric cars are just better for many people, and the next set of 300 km range cars coming out will be the real turning point.

Offline gord_boyd

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Carma: +7/-24
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '12 A7, '85 911 turbo
About 1600 responses with 2nd follow-up today.

Offline gord_boyd

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Carma: +7/-24
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '12 A7, '85 911 turbo
The 'Green Energy Act' will cost us Ontarians $132B. extra between 2006 and 2032--according to our Auditor General.  Never delivered on so called 'green jobs' but costs are 1% GDP on our backs that Government never were transparent on.  It is no wonder manufacturing is shrinking!  Actual consumption of electricity is down 14%.

Offline bye

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2598
  • Carma: +313/-518
  • member
    • View Profile
Actual consumption of electricity is down 14%.

1 million electric cars would make a good dent in that electricity consumption drop, and use up the surplus overnight electricity we will continue to have, care of the $20 billion (before cost overruns) nuclear power refurbishment is going to cost.

Offline gord_boyd

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Carma: +7/-24
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '12 A7, '85 911 turbo
German electrical costs much higher--partly because they decided not to refurbish.  I live in a nuclear supportive Community (Southampton ), the largest Nuclear Plant in the world is Bruce Power --a private
Partnership with government that is very progressive.  Part of the reason we were able to get rid of coal - fired electricity in Ontario is because of the innovation still being applied to Candu Reactors.
But over and above your $20 Mil. Refurbishment is the cost for cradle-to-grave waste management.
Putting waste into non-biosphere rock down the distance of CN Tower is the safe option.  But our summer visitors awaiting outcome of their fight against this by end of this year.  They do not want to take responsibility today for the benefits they have enjoyed along the way.  They prefer to push problem to their grandchildren.

Offline ArticSteve

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 27803
  • Carma: +310/-6811
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Hobby Car: 15 Mustang Vert, V6, manual, 3.55 lsd; 2024 MDX Aspec; 2022 F150 TREMOR lifted
The 'Green Energy Act' will cost us Ontarians $132B. extra between 2006 and 2032--according to our Auditor General.  Never delivered on so called 'green jobs' but costs are 1% GDP on our backs that Government never were transparent on.  It is no wonder manufacturing is shrinking!  Actual consumption of electricity is down 14%.

^

 :fiver:

Offline safristi

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 46229
  • Carma: +471/-416
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: since the beginning of Saf timeLOTUS ELAN,STANDARD... 10, MG midget, MGB (2),Mazda Millennia,Hyundai Veloster and 1997 Ford Ranger 2014 Subaru Forester XT
where's that CAN DU spirit..............i see WYNNE-Mills all around South Hampton beach :stick:


this message was approved by Artic Steve & Donald Trump.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2016, 07:32:28 am by safristi »
Time is to stop everything happening at once

Offline gord_boyd

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Carma: +7/-24
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '12 A7, '85 911 turbo
Jeffery Simpson says it best in an article about Mr. Glen Murray, Ontario's Liberals' Environment Minister
who chose 'Cap and Trade':
" It is abhorrent to Liberals and especially Mr. Glen Murray, to have carbon pricing not increase revenues to government--as the British Columbia system does."

Offline gord_boyd

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Carma: +7/-24
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '12 A7, '85 911 turbo
Let me correct Smart Electric who in my mind is not so 'smart' to criticize nuclear and Bruce Power.

Here is a recap on costs electricity for 2015:
Av. residential is $100 / MW/h
Bruce Power is $63 / MW/h
Wind is $119 / MW/h
Nat. gas is $199 / MW/h
Solar is $501 / MW/h
In other words if all your electricity is from Bruce Power you would see a 30% drop in your bill!

Not only does this Private Co. Take all the financial risk; they pay rental to people owned facilities of millions while paying the $13 B and assume all costs for nuclear wastes and decommissioning.

Another benefit are the 5000 dir. And indirect. Employees--JOBS. And these jobs are high tech and pay is on Par with Ft. Mac.
During the twenty years there is $1B/Year annual economic benefit on the Refurbishment.
Bruce Power contributed 70% capability to shut down coal--the linkage to Billions of Savings in Health Care is there with cleaner air.  No Smog Days in 2015!
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 03:16:54 pm by gord_boyd »

Offline Ex-airbalancer

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 40151
  • Carma: +729/-1584
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 Silverado 1500 LTZ ext ended cab , 2013 Lexus RX-350 F Sport
Let me correct Smart Electric who in my mind is not so 'smart' to criticize nuclear and Bruce Power.

Here is a recap on costs electricity for 2015:
Av. residential is $100 / MW/h
Bruce Power is $63 / MW/h
Wind is $119 / MW/h
Nat. gas is $199 / MW/h
Solar is $501 / MW/h
In other words if all your electricity is from Bruce Power you would see a 30% drop in your bill!

Not only does this Private Co. Take all the financial risk; they pay rental to people owned facilities of millions while paying the $13 B and assume all costs for nuclear wastes and decommissioning.

Another benefit are the 5000 dir. And indirect. Employees--JOBS. And these jobs are high tech and pay is on Par with Ft. Mac.
During the twenty years there is $1B/Year annual economic benefit on the Refurbishment.
Bruce Power contributed 70% capability to shut down coal--the linkage to Billions of Savings in Health Care is there with learner air.  No Smog Days in 2015!
What happens to the price when you included the storage of the spend fuel rods, there is no  permanent location and the clean of Port Hope ?

Offline tpl

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 23908
  • Carma: +298/-675
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2022 Taos
Those spent fuel rods still contain a lot of energy....if the didn't they would just be inert lumps of lead.
So why cannot some bright young engineer come up with a generator to use that energy....even if it is just a low pressure steam engine.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Offline Ex-airbalancer

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 40151
  • Carma: +729/-1584
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 Silverado 1500 LTZ ext ended cab , 2013 Lexus RX-350 F Sport
Those spent fuel rods still contain a lot of energy....if the didn't they would just be inert lumps of lead.
So why cannot some bright young engineer come up with a generator to use that energy....even if it is just a low pressure steam engine.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
This is what they doing now
http://www.lfpress.com/2016/04/05/officials-are-looking-for-a-new-home-for-26-million-highly-radioactive-fuel-rods-from-nuclear-plants

Offline bye

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2598
  • Carma: +313/-518
  • member
    • View Profile
In other words if all your electricity is from Bruce Power you would see a 30% drop in your bill!

Today...but when the refurbishment gets going, the cost will go up, as Bruce is securing a raise for the price they get for nuclear power.

New wind is now building out cheaper power than the cost of refurbished nuclear as per:
http://environmentaldefence.ca/2016/04/26/cost-competitive-renewable-energy-has-arrived-in-ontario/

Quote
The five contracts for wind power came in at prices ranging from 6.45 to 10.55 cents/kWh, for an average of 8.59 cents/kWh

You also know that Bruce Nuclear is paid by us to boil water at night right?!  We PAY bruce to lower their output out of the need for more flexibility, because, you know, we don't use enough electricity during the overnight period, so we buy the power from Bruce and sell it at a loss to NY state because no one wants to pay 6c/kWh when there is no demand!

So....this is all true, wind is now quoting cheaper cost than the upcoming nuclear cost, and nuclear currently is so inflexible that Ontario pays the US to take our power over night.

Nuclear is fine, until it's not.



Offline 99 Silver

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1082
  • Carma: +17/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Dog lover
    • View Profile
A new Ontario: Electric cars and unicorns
'The Globe and Mail Metro (Ontario Edition)' - 2016-05-24
mwente@globeandmail.com MARGARET WENTE

The province’s leaked green plan would be a gravy train for subsidy seekers, lobbyists and hawkers of renewable-energy schemes
The future is going to be a lot of fun in Ontario. Just a few years from now, millions of us will be liberated from our evil fossil-fuelled transportation network. Millions of government-subsidized electric cars will whisk us silently to work. Our buses will run on biofuels. Our retrofitted geothermal-powered homes will keep us warm at prices much higher than today’s natural gas (which would be banned). Vast tracts of land will be diverted to solar panels, which will transform the sun’s rays into clean, green, righteous energy – as soon as we can figure out how to store it and attach it to the grid. Unicorns will frolic in our gardens, and pigs will fly.
Ontario’s new draft Climate Change Action Plan is a breathtaking work of fantasy, wrought by folks who evidently never met an engineer, an economist, or anybody else who knows how the real world works. Glen Murray, the Environment Minister, is a notoriously Big Thinker. There is nothing necessarily wrong with government ministers who majored in social work and community development. But they absolutely should not be allowed to run amok unsupervised.
The provincial government will reduce our carbon footprint by micromanaging every aspect of our lives and our economy. Its plan will throw our auto and energy industries into chaos, and further enrage every small town in Ontario, whose rights have been trampled by German salesmen selling giant industrial wind turbines. It will drive some of the highest electricity prices in North America even higher.
Not everyone will lose, though. The Action Plan will be a gravy train for subsidy seekers, lobbyists and hawkers of green schemes, who show up in droves whenever free money’s being handed out.
It’s hard to pick out one wrong thing with this plan, because all of it is nutty. Let’s start with electric cars. The plan says 12 per cent of all new cars should be electric by 2025. (The market share of electric cars in Canada is currently 0.35 per cent.) How will this happen? Subsidies! You too can drive a Tesla.
There’s just one thing wrong with electric cars. Even when they’re subsidized, people don’t want them. They are high-cost and low-range. They take forever to recharge, and we would need a massive investment in infrastructure to keep them fuelled. But hey! As soon as those problems get fixed, which is no time anyone can foresee, I’m there.
Our Environment Minister actually believes that Ontario, which supplies less than 1 per cent of the global car market, should become a global hub of electric-car manufacturing. Unfortunately, auto manufacturers appear to have different views. But at least no one can accuse him of thinking small.
Our provincial government aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. How realistic is this? Maybe not so much. Back in 2008, Google announced an ambitious plan called “Clean Energy 2030,” which called for weaning the United States off oil and gas for electricity generation by 2030, and reducing oil use for cars by 44 per cent. A few years later, Google gave up and pronounced the plan undoable. But what does it know?
At least the Ontario government has a track record of green investments. The Green Energy Act, which subsidized thousands of wind towers across the province at ruinous expense, will wind up costing Ontarians an extra $170-billion for electricity between 2006 and 2032, according to the Auditor-General. The greening of the economy was supposed to produce thousands of green jobs, which never did materialize. But as we watch our hydro bills soar, at least we have the satisfaction of knowing we are single-handedly saving the planet.
Some people argue that saving the environment is such an urgent task that bad ideas are better than no ideas at all. At least it’s a start! These people should come to Ontario, where unicorns frolic in the gardens and the manufacturers are moving south. The one sure way to shrink our carbon footprint is to shrink our economy. The way things are going, we could be very good at that.

© Copyright 2016 The Globe and Mail Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Jerry
Kitchener
13 Boxster
17 Lexus RX350
In the past: 12 Acura TL, 04 MazdaSpeed Miata, 07 Infiniti M35, 05 Infiniti G35x, 03 Infiniti G35, 99 Acura 3.2TL, 99 Miata, 95 Chrysler Sebring, 93 Ford Probe GT, 93 Chrysler Concorde, 89 Taurus SHO, 86 Taurus, 79 Mazda RX7

Offline tpl

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 23908
  • Carma: +298/-675
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2022 Taos
From Smart Electric's article:
"Fuel rod bundles:

Each about the size of a fireplace log

Contain 38 fuel rods, with a total of 20 kilograms of uranium.

Each can power 100 homes for a year

Used for about 18 months in reactors, then put in water pools to cool down for 10 years, by which time 99.9% of their radioactivity is gone."


So lots of energy just need a way to use it.


Question:    These bundles are used for 18 months in power reactors...but the reactors used in USN aircraft carriers only get refueled every 20 years although it takes a 4 year drydock refit to do it.   Part of it I guess is that the Navy reactors are smaller than power reactors on land.

Offline Ex-airbalancer

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 40151
  • Carma: +729/-1584
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 Silverado 1500 LTZ ext ended cab , 2013 Lexus RX-350 F Sport
I wonder why they cannot put water turbines in the St Lawance River
There is always water flowing even in the winter
Water turbines are very easy to turn on and off

Offline gord_boyd

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Carma: +7/-24
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '12 A7, '85 911 turbo
Bruce Power is the only nuclear supplier in Canada that has flexibility--2,500 megawatts that can be turned down when demand not there--but all 6,300 megawatts available from 8 reactors when demand is peaking.

DGRs ( Deep Geological/ Non Biosphere / Repositoriy )both # 1 in next decade ( low and intermediate nuclear wastes and planned for Bruce Power site ) and #2 in a couple of decades ( for spent nuclear fuel rods ) are necessary part of the nuclear cycle.

Some extended use of nuclear rods schemes would generate biochemical wastes that are unacceptable to proper nuclear waste management, and are at laboratory stage.  Remember 'PCBs' , well this kind of problem is rejected by the professionals who are very aware different efforts.

Electricity pricing has already paid for waste management.  Bruce Power accepted responsibility of costs
and have built this into their model.  DGR1 is already costed and built into what you pay today.

Offline gord_boyd

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Carma: +7/-24
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '12 A7, '85 911 turbo
The problem with wind, even lower cost wind, and the potential for offshore bigger, more efficient turbines, is storage.  Two new gas-powered electricity units being completed now have to cover off down time for wind.
The 'envelope' costs of wind are much bigger than what Smart Electric quotes above.

The second problem with Wind is loss of aesthetics of landscape--perhaps clustering in Europe more acceptable by Public.  Maybe we have to change for saving the planet--but poor planning does not help Public appetite.
And here in Port Elgin,the Unifor wind turbine, had OMB approval for older set-backs that were NOT acceptable in other Provinces or across Europe at the time.  Unifor ( CAW ) have done nothing but add to the divisiveness within our Community but Municipalities have no Power under the Green Energy Act--noise and health issues be damned. 

We unfortunately, are the case study on how the Province Liberals got it wrong.

Offline Sir Osis of Liver

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 28596
  • Carma: +1376/-1726
  • Gender: Male
  • Ramblin' man
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2017 KTM DUKE 390, 2019 VW Jetta GLI 35th Anniversary
The problem with wind, even lower cost wind, and the potential for offshore bigger, more efficient turbines, is storage.  Two new gas-powered electricity units being completed now have to cover off down time for wind.
The 'envelope' costs of wind are much bigger than what Smart Electric quotes above.

The second problem with Wind is loss of aesthetics of landscape--perhaps clustering in Europe more acceptable by Public.  Maybe we have to change for saving the planet--but poor planning does not help Public appetite.
And here in Port Elgin,the Unifor wind turbine, had OMB approval for older set-backs that were NOT acceptable in other Provinces or across Europe at the time.  Unifor ( CAW ) have done nothing but add to the divisiveness within our Community but Municipalities have no Power under the Green Energy Act--noise and health issues be damned. 

We unfortunately, are the case study on how the Province Liberals got it wrong.

There are issues with wind, but that one is just NIMBYism and should never factor into planning.
On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

H. L. Mencken