Steve Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Raf and Mister G, what wind farm(s) do you leave near that don't allow you to open your windows due to noise?
Mister G Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 trying to find a date on that article...appears to be from 2013. as of 2014 and 2015, there is a moratorium on offshore development of wind turbines (and rightly so). Moratoriums expire, government head change all while huge corporations (many times foreign companies) wait in the wings with a boot load of subsidized taxpayer money to forge ahead. Never say never is what I have learned over the years.
John Bacon Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Any idea what price our government pays for nuclear power? And any idea of the fix guaranteed contract we gave the nuclear power plants to purchase their power, whether we actually purchase it or not? I suggest some folks do some reading, and some learning, so that you become much better informed. I think it is 4.5 cents per kwh.
manitoubass2 Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 I have a train run 40 yards in front of my house 12 times a day/night. It literally shakes the house. Do wind turbines really generate such unbearable sounds? Or just enough to disturb peace? Honest question And for the record I enjoy the train lol
Steve Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 John, in order to property determine what we pay for nuclear power, you have to look over a period of time (typically one year). You take the amount we pay, and divide by what we actually receive. Saying $0.045 is not necessarily correct, as we are paying for power we don't receive (which then inflates the actual cost per kw of nuclear power). Some years work out better than others. Years that we don't consume as much, the nuclear cost goes up substantially, as again, we are forced via contract to purchase a certain amount of kw's per year, even if we don't actually take it. Bruce power has a very lucrative deal with Ontario. They get paid for power that we don't even consume.
John Bacon Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 John, in order to property determine what we pay for nuclear power, you have to look over a period of time (typically one year). You take the amount we pay, and divide by what we actually receive. Saying $0.045 is not necessarily correct, as we are paying for power we don't receive (which then inflates the actual cost per kw of nuclear power). Some years work out better than others. Years that we don't consume as much, the nuclear cost goes up substantially, as again, we are forced via contract to purchase a certain amount of kw's per year, even if we don't actually take it. Bruce power has a very lucrative deal with Ontario. They get paid for power that we don't even consume. Fair point; but don't we have the same issues with solar and wind power?
Steve Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 no. we purchase solar power without guaranteed purchase contracts. we guarantee a price per kw purchased from green energy sources, but not a minimum purchase amount with any developer. i understand we will be non renewing our guaranteed purchase contracts with nuclear power. when that happens, we will stop selling power to the US, because we will not be forced to purchase unneeded power from nuclear sources.
Tomcat Posted October 17, 2015 Author Report Posted October 17, 2015 do some reading. you might be surprised. we are contracted to purchase a minimum amount of nuclear power, regardless if we actually purchase it. which means, in periods of low power consumption, we are still paying nuclear producers a minimum amount, regardless if we use it....at those periods, the cost per kw is higher than any form of energy currently produced. Just wondering Steve whether you could elaborate on your statement that at times, nuclear power can be the highest cost source. The data in the following table was excerpted from the Regulated Price Plan Price Report (OEB) for 1 Nov 2015 to 21 Oct 2016 Source % of Total Supply Total unit cost (cents/kWh) Nuclear 60 6.9 Hydro 22 6.0 Gas 8 16.3 Wind 7 13.3 Solar 2 47.5 The Ontario Energy Board release announcing electricity prices effective 1 Nov 2015 said, inter alia, that 40% of the increase in rates was due to nuclear and hydro electric power while approximately 1/3 of the rate increase was due to green sources of power (e.g. wind, solar). That doesn't seem so bad at first glance but when you understand that nuclear and hydro electric power represent 82% of our supply whereas green sources only represent 9% of our supply, it makes me question whether spending all this money on green sources will ever have a positive payback for Ontario residents with no connection to energy supply. Lastly, I also downloaded the Hourly Ontario Electricity Price for 2015 year to date. What shocked me the most were the huge fluctuations in the hourly cost of electricity. For instance, the hourly price of electricity at 9 AM on 2 Oct 2015 was 1053.11 cents/kWh while the price on the same day at 8 AM was 34.3 cents/kWh. Can you shed any light on the cause for such huge fluctuations.
Steve Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 See my post #106 above regarding your question on costs. It isn't as black and white as it appears when talking nuclear costs. Btw, I still heavily support the need for nuclear power. also, you need to include hydro in your green power numbers, as hydro certainly is a form of green energy. i'm going to continue this discussion later, but my wife and I are leaving soon to see Paul McCartney in Toronto. I love these types of posts....and don't think I don't see the problems/challenges of green energy...it certainly has its flaws as well. I just try and help diffuse some of the incorrect rumors that float around...
John Bacon Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Lastly, I also downloaded the Hourly Ontario Electricity Price for 2015 year to date. What shocked me the most were the huge fluctuations in the hourly cost of electricity. For instance, the hourly price of electricity at 9 AM on 2 Oct 2015 was 1053.11 cents/kWh while the price on the same day at 8 AM was 34.3 cents/kWh. Can you shed any light on the cause for such huge fluctuations. That is not the cost to produce it. It is the cost to buy it. The demand is higher during the day when factories and offices are running. So lots of people need to buy electricity. When the factories are not operating fewer people want to buy electricity so the demand side of the equasion drops. It comes down to supply and demand.
woodenboater Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 The local band office down home just finished a environmental study to put up a windmill farm basically across the front of henvey inlet and key harbour ,I think it will just add to the mystic untouched beauty of the French River This has been talked about for years. I've been onto that piece of land and not sure what the visual footprint will be like from the water or nearby areas.
Canuck2fan Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Lastly, I also downloaded the Hourly Ontario Electricity Price for 2015 year to date. What shocked me the most were the huge fluctuations in the hourly cost of electricity. For instance, the hourly price of electricity at 9 AM on 2 Oct 2015 was 1053.11 cents/kWh while the price on the same day at 8 AM was 34.3 cents/kWh. Can you shed any light on the cause for such huge fluctuations. It is not because electricity is a commodity and is "traded" constantly by the minute or hour? Since there is no place to "store" it, once it is produced it is basically a use it or lose it commodity as well. That is also why we sell excess to the States and other provinces for cheap, it is either that or get absolutely nothing for it. The only way to have a flat price would be to be able to produce exactly just enough at exact time it is needed. Pretty much an impossible task to guess that closely.
Spiel Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 I don't mind paying for the real cost of electricity, it's the paying of exorbitant salaries to the undeserving upper echelon by an already over burdened populace that burns my ass!
Old Man Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 It is not because electricity is a commodity and is "traded" constantly by the minute or hour? Since there is no place to "store" it, once it is produced it is basically a use it or lose it commodity as well. That is also why we sell excess to the States and other provinces for cheap, it is either that or get absolutely nothing for it. The only way to have a flat price would be to be able to produce exactly just enough at exact time it is needed. Pretty much an impossible task to guess that closely. True, which is why with with gas fired and nuclear electricity generating methods, you can control the timing and amount that is produced. Manitoba Hydro, despite having a vast amount of hydro produced electricity still uses gas fired plants at Selkirk and Brandon for control over peak periods. With wind and solar, you can't. Makes it more inefficient for that reason alone.
dave524 Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 (edited) I don't mind paying for the real cost of electricity, it's the paying of exorbitant salaries to the undeserving upper echelon by an already over burdened populace that burns my ass https://www.facebook.com/ontariopc/videos/10153312175974107/ Edited October 17, 2015 by dave524
Spiel Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 https://www.facebook.com/ontariopc/videos/10153312175974107/ Exactly. I've said it here before and I'll say it again. I'll gladly pay a months worth of hydro and live in the dark if they use my paid share to electrocute the witch!
Mister G Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 It is not because electricity is a commodity and is "traded" constantly by the minute or hour? Since there is no place to "store" it, once it is produced it is basically a use it or lose it commodity as well. That is also why we sell excess to the States and other provinces for cheap, it is either that or get absolutely nothing for it. The only way to have a flat price would be to be able to produce exactly just enough at exact time it is needed. Pretty much an impossible task to guess that closely. If they are selling to foreign interest because they have excess, I would think they should first and foremost sell to Canadian residents at a lower rate (off peak hour rates) all the time instead of thumbing their noses at those who subsided them in the first place. Bottom line is that GREEN energy means MORE GREEN their pockets and less in our pockets. Soon or later people will wake up one day and see the light.
Mister G Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 True, which is why with with gas fired and nuclear electricity generating methods, you can control the timing and amount that is produced. Manitoba Hydro, despite having a vast amount of hydro produced electricity still uses gas fired plants at Selkirk and Brandon for control over peak periods. With wind and solar, you can't. Makes it more inefficient for that reason alone. BINGO............all those Money Mills turning all night long gets paid for electric you can't or don't want to use.
dave524 Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Want to go green , stop buying made in China
Gerritt Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 Want to go green , stop buying made in China I'd like to see facts back this chart up..... And not some hypothesis from an undergrad... Who created it, and the documentation to support it... I follow facts, not pie charts!
dave524 Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 I'd like to see facts back this chart up..... And not some hypothesis from an undergrad... Who created it, and the documentation to support it... I follow facts, not pie charts! http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html#.ViL2TTZdHmQ
Canuck2fan Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 If they are selling to foreign interest because they have excess, I would think they should first and foremost sell to Canadian residents at a lower rate (off peak hour rates) all the time instead of thumbing their noses at those who subsided them in the first place. Bottom line is that GREEN energy means MORE GREEN their pockets and less in our pockets. Soon or later people will wake up one day and see the light. I agree we deserve the cheapest rates... "Their pockets" being lined with green who are they? You do realize that a TON of staunchly rural conservatives sell green energy to us.... I happen to know a few, they were farmers or rural land owners wealthy enough to jump on the steal of a deal solar panel program. Hell anybody who could have afforded to get in to it when the contracts were offering sky high returns would have been stupid not to have taken the money.... BECAUSE CAPITALISM LOL
Sterling Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) This image is highly suspicous and reeks of propaganda. Even assuming the first quote is correct (which I highly doubt), the goal should be to achieve reach a state where we can make steel (for example) from green energy. Remember; there are powerful companies with a lot to gain by discrediting green energy. https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-the-carbon-released-from-the-manufacturing-of-a-wind-turbine-is-far-greater-than-the-carbon-saved-by-substituting-wind-power-for-carbon-based-power Edited October 18, 2015 by Sterling
dave524 Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 This image is highly suspicous and reeks of propaganda. Even assuming the first quote is correct (which I highly doubt), the goal should be to achieve reach a state where we can make steel (for example) from green energy. Remember; there are powerful companies with a lot to gain by discrediting green energy. https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-the-carbon-released-from-the-manufacturing-of-a-wind-turbine-is-far-greater-than-the-carbon-saved-by-substituting-wind-power-for-carbon-based-power He appears to a respected author on climate change and carbon emissions, just not a fan of wind turbines as a viable source of green energy http://www.amazon.ca/Carbon-Shift-Climate-Crisis-Change/dp/0307357198
Steve Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 the "poster" certainly reeks of propaganda. I already pointed that out on this thread. The poster creator conveniently removed the part where the author of the quote stated that a wind turbine in in a good area reaches net benefit in year 3 (or less) on a 20 year plan. You just have to do some reading on your own, and not accept the fear mongering propaganda that is being shown. Good on you to sniff that out Sterling.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now