HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2012, 4:31 AM
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 9,119
Quote:
Originally Posted by haljackey View Post
Its official, I now live by the largest nuke plant in the world.

I swear this is the only place in the world that makes nuke plants these days (for better or worse)
....


List showing the largest nuke plants in the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...power_stations
Bruce is an old station that is being refurbished not a new station. Canada has not built a new generating station in many years. The wikipedia link you have towards the bottom has a table of new stations under construction. China, Russia, South Korea, India, Taiwan, Slovenia and Brazil all appears to be building new plants.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2012, 6:50 AM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
Without diving into the politics of nuclear, all I will say is that nuclear has a place and reactors are already built. There's no need to shut down nuclear reactors that have been operating safely for many years. It just places more stress on the generation system. Nuclear energy isn't "clean" but its better than dumping tons of global warming gases and toxins into the atmosphere. Drawback - obviously - is that if there is a mistake, its a toxic radioactive blow that could kill thousands or potentially millions of people. So nuclear should only be generated under the tightest regulations and most stringent quality checks and only operated with the latest in technology. And yes, new nuclear generation should be highly scrutinized and debated before even considered as a possibility. But the good news is that mistakes of grand magnitude are increasingly rare, Japan's crisis came about from a huge tsunami. None of Ontario's generation plants are threatened by the types of natural disasters that make them at serious risk.

The push toward renewable energy has to have government incentives, the private market doesn't seem to have incentive to invest into expensive new technology and the only effective organization that can is government until the market finally starts to see more green (as in profit) from renewables. Maybe the execution could have been better, but the investments in green energy in the last 10 years have been well worth it.

Coal isn't clean, no matter how "clean" they try to advertise it. Coal is mined dirty, it burns dirty, and only a fraction of the CO2 is captured when you take into consideration how much effort goes into mining the crap, how much carbon it takes to burn it during transport, and the fact that you still get emissions that are far beyond CO2 even with the best scrubber technology we have today. Natural Gas is a 10x better solution and coal should be shut down at every chance we get. Coal is outdated and natural gas is more abundant than ever before due to fracking. Maybe fracking isn't great, but its better than mining coal and transporting it via carbon burning trucks and trains. Natural Gas can at least be sent through a pipeline as opposed to through trains and trucks, and when its burned it burns very clean relative to coal even with scrubbers and so-called "clean coal" technology.

Coal also has an after effect. Coal is a solid or semi-solid substance, when it burns it leaves a toxic afterburn substance we call coal ash. So coal isn't just horrible before, unlike natural gas which burns clean, coal ash becomes a toxic substance that must be stored after burning. Anyone ever heard of the horrific toxic coal ash spill in Kingston, TN? Read up on it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsto...h_slurry_spill

Coal should forever be ended and it should never be brought back. It is a hundreds year old technology and should be done away with ASAP. The danger coal ash presents is 100x more dangerous than the fluids they pump underground for fracking purposes and coal ash is a danger almost never talked about. There's nothing clean about "clean" coal technology. Some of the toxins stored in coal ash will be around for thousands of years before it even starts to break down organically, the only thing more dangerous is nuclear fallout. The best "clean" coal technology to sequester emissions during burning will never, ever make the toxic coal ash problem go away. Coal is the best technology the 1200's or 1500's could provide, it has no place in the modern world.

One thing is clear: deregulated energy is a disaster when it comes to hydro generation. Its failed in virtually every circumstance its been tried in. New York State has been experimenting with private energy supplier choices for almost 20 years now, the experiment has resulted in higher consumer energy costs than there was before.

California was a disaster, enough said. Ontario needs to regulate energy again and take back the power it wasted away on private operators that only see green in terms of profits to be made by strangling supply, not balancing supply.

Lastly, to anyone who whines and moans and complains about wind energy, they don't deserve a seat at the table for debate. If you are going to whine, moan, and complain about how aesthetically unpleasing a windmill is, or harp on the "dangers" of wind turbine noise or the fact that birds may fly into them, then you really are someone who should give up electricity altogether and go buy a cabin in the woods and live without hydro. I have no respect for anyone who is in opposition to wind or solar farms, they simply don't deserve to live in the 21st century and should admit they would be better served by going back to pre-electric days if they really want to have no impact on the environment. There isn't a less invasive way to generate electricity than to do it via hydroelectric or wind or solar, no one opposing these forms should be taken seriously.

Last edited by Dr Nevergold; Nov 2, 2012 at 7:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2012, 10:57 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
Thunder Bay Generating Station's natural gas conversion has been cancelled again. It will continue to burn coal and dump its radioactive fly ash into a marsh for the near future, unless it is shut down in which case the city will lose is single largest tax payer and over 100 well-paying jobs.

Thanks, Liberal government! Nothing they have planned for this plant has come to fruition. They were going to close it in 2007, updated that to 2009, then 2011, then 2012, then 2014, then cancelled the closure entirely and decided to upgrade it to natural gas, then cancelled it, then resurrected it, then put it on hold, resurrected it again and now they've cancelled it. I can only guess that resurrecting it will be part of their platform in the next election! The plant currently isn't operating at full capacity, only as stand-by power, but still, it's an important part of this community. NWO is for the most part electrically independent except for the fact that this plant imports its fuel from Virginia and Saskatchewan (we're even on a separate grid from the rest of North America), but losing this plant will cost us that independence.

The mining boom is going to need energy. The Liberals seem quite intent on preventing that boom.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 12:13 AM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
What has caused the failure of these natural gas plants coming to fruition? Is it simply a lack of funding that has caused the projects to be cancelled?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 12:49 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
What has caused the failure of these natural gas plants coming to fruition? Is it simply a lack of funding that has caused the projects to be cancelled?
OPG says they can't go ahead unless they find a way to save $400 million. Union Gas is going to sue for the millions they've invested into the pipeline that would have served the plant, and the loss in business from the infrastructure investments they were going to make in conjunction with the conversion. The project isn't actually cancelled, it's just paused, so we're just repeating what we did a few years ago the first time we paused the gas conversion for reasons I can't even recall now.

In southern Ontario, the flip-flopping on the projects are mainly political.

From the gas plants to the Green Energy Act, it is very clear that the provincial Liberals don't know what they're doing with regards to Ontario's energy needs.

http://www.tbnewswatch.com/news/2445...version-halted
http://www.tbnewswatch.com/news/245385/Powered-up

And apparently the deadline to quit coal is now 2015. When did that happen? Wasn't it 2014 during the election last year? Will it be 2016 next year? The fuck?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 1:27 AM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
^Okay, so the question is still out there, is a lack of funding the problem with this project going through? The Green Energy Program has been a success in southern Ontario, the windfarms are up and running.

Natural Gas plants have been cancelled or paused all over the province, and the question remains is it a funding issue or not? That's the question that we need answers on. If the province has little means to invest into a huge project right now, that may explain the delay more than saying its pure politics.

Also, who makes the decisions? Is it the government or is it OPG? I know OPG is a government owned entity, but who actually made the decision to fund or not fund the gas conversion in Thunder Bay and when did that decision occur?

Last edited by Dr Nevergold; Nov 3, 2012 at 1:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 1:42 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
This is Ontario. Specifically, this is electricity generation in Ontario. Questions like that simply don't get answered.

If you want to ask our MPP, his phone number is 1807 623 9237
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 1:47 AM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
The reason for the question is because Ontario has a huge funding gap in the budget right now, and with limited funds all kinds of plans are being cut that were previously scheduled to go forward. It would explain the start, pause, start, stop situation you're describing. It may be that the funding just isn't there, but I don't know enough about how OPG operates. Is the budget they have for the TB Generation conversion an OPG budget or a provincial budget item? There are so many unanswered questions, and I may be asking an unanswerable question, but is it truly "politics" or is it a budget problem? We don't seem to have the answer to that question. And if its a budget problem, where did the investment originally come from? The province or through hydro ratepayers directly?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 2:34 AM
haljackey's Avatar
haljackey haljackey is offline
User Registered
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 3,205
Bruce may be old but it is now the largest in the world with the units brought back online and the stoppage of nuclear power generation in Japan.

This graphic shows when coal stations are online: http://media.cns-snc.ca/ontarioelect...ectricity.html

Clean coal is a joke... Nat gas is a better solution for the time being.

Once thorium reactors are perfected they can replace our uranium nukes...
__________________
My Twitter

My Simcity Stuff
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 2:40 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
I think OPG gets its revenue from rate payers, which for the Thunder Bay Generating Station would be mostly Thunder Bay Hydro customers in the city. I don't think the project was listed in the budget but I am pretty sure OPG was receiving provincial funding to do it, our MPPs were there when it was announced with big smiles on their faces.

The whole hydro funding situation is really muddy.

And with regards to the Green Energy Act, it seems to me that the whole process is really skewed in the favour of the developers. If Northern Ontario is shutting down or bypassing its plants because there is too much energy on the grid, how is spending 80 cents per kWh to generate more electricity a good idea? Solar panels are paving over habitat and the wind farms are carving roads though habitat, but we can't run our power plant for more than a few hours a year because the energy it creates can't actually go anywhere.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 4:48 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,244
The Ontario Power Authority (OPA) does conservation, planning, and clean-energy contracting for the province and in the Thunder Bay case is negotiating on behalf of the Province/Crown with Ontario Power Generation, which is a Crown Corporation that generates power. The majority of green projects are done by the private sector, not OPG.
The Thunder Bay conversion project is OPG, while the two GTA plants were private sector. OPA is rethinking the Thunder Bay project based on those articles in an effort to save money, but the other two were cancelled for political reasons due to promises made in the last election by the Premier/Cabinet/Liberals.. once reelected they directed OPA, which had already entered into contracts, to stop the projects. Contracts were signed and in one case construction was already started, hence the hundreds of millions in settlement costs that are in the news lately. Those two GTA projects will now be built beside existing plants near Lambton and Bath.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 6:31 AM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
So the gas generation plants that were canceled in the Mississauga-Oakville area are being constructed at a different location?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 2:18 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
So the gas generation plants that were canceled in the Mississauga-Oakville area are being constructed at a different location?
yep, the Oakville plant is being built near Bath Ontario beside an existing gas generating station, the Mississauaga plant is being built beside an existing coal station in Lambton (near Sarnia)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 5:35 PM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
Ah, well it doesn't sound like much news is there... I keep hearing the media harp "bloody scandal" so often that I didn't even get the real information. All you hear is 25% of the story and didn't realize they had relocated the gas plants. I am fully supportive of that if the people in Mississauga and Oakville didn't want those jobs, so be it. I don't know why they were so opposed to it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 5:55 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
Ah, well it doesn't sound like much news is there... I keep hearing the media harp "bloody scandal" so often that I didn't even get the real information. All you hear is 25% of the story and didn't realize they had relocated the gas plants. I am fully supportive of that if the people in Mississauga and Oakville didn't want those jobs, so be it. I don't know why they were so opposed to it.
Cancelling the existing contracts cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in direct costs and potentially over a billion dollars according to some analysts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 6:14 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
The cost is the main problem, except for people living near the original proposed sites, the plants themselves aren't that big an issue. The Liberals went ahead with those plants in the first place with very little consultation of the people living in those areas, then waited too long in the construction process to cancel or relocate the plant, and now a cash-strapped and indebted province is on the hook for hundreds of millions if not a billion dollars. This is similar to the desire by the PCs to shut down the Samsung contract (another seriously flawed Liberal policy) which would cost the province more than simply staying the course.

As I said before, when it comes to energy policy, the Ontario Liberals seem to have no clue whatsoever on what they're doing. In terms of finances, the Ontario energy contract scandals combined are probably among the country's costliest controversies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 6:28 PM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
It is highly, highly unlikely that the cost of moving these two plants will cost $1 billion in "penalties" over the move. It will likely be around $250 million in direct penalties based on the articles I've read this morning.

I got wind of this article:

http://www.thestar.com/business/arti...g-says-analyst

The analyst doesn't even have clear data, he seems straightforward, but his numbers range from $200 million to $400 million for new transmission lines from Bath.

The problem with the media hype is that building new transmission lines from Bath to Toronto and other parts of Ontario isn't scandalous, and it doesn't really matter considering the hydro infrastructure needs to be upgraded anyway. And the articles show that the people paying for the transmission are ratepayers, not tax revenue.

The only "scandal" is the perceived benefit McGuinty got from listening to voters in those areas and relocating the plants. That really isn't scandal. What we're talking about here is the undetermined cost of new transmission lines.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 6:44 PM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
Bottom line is that direct penalties for moving the gas plants is around $230-250 million. It isn't scandal, its just a cost of moving the plants.

It will cost another $200-250 million to build new transmission lines from Bath as opposed to the local infrastructure in Oakville, and this is going to be shared among all Ontario Power ratepayers as an infrastructure upgrade that will last generations and generations into the future.

The taxpayer is footing the $200 million bill for the move, ratepayers are footing the $200 million for transmission lines.

The number I don't have yet is how much overall does it cost to upgrade to natural gas at the two plants now being converted? What is the capital cost of both upgrades?

Going forward, it may be better to decommission the nuclear upgrades at play and to build more natural gas generation if nuclear is cost prohibitive. I could easily see cost savings in switching to natural gas and canceling some of the nuclear upgrades. This whole "scandal" could be come out to be a net savings if they decide not to go nuclear.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2012, 9:42 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
It is highly, highly unlikely that the cost of moving these two plants will cost $1 billion in "penalties" over the move. It will likely be around $250 million in direct penalties based on the articles I've read this morning.
Well that makes everything ok!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
The analyst doesn't even have clear data, he seems straightforward, but his numbers range from $200 million to $400 million for new transmission lines from Bath.
There is also contract cancellations and the undoing of construction work at the original site, unless they're just leaving it. At least when Harris cancelled projects that were already underway he filled in the holes and planted sod on top of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
And the articles show that the people paying for the transmission are ratepayers, not tax revenue.
Ratepayers and taxpayers are the same people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
The only "scandal" is the perceived benefit McGuinty got from listening to voters in those areas and relocating the plants. That really isn't scandal. What we're talking about here is the undetermined cost of new transmission lines.
No, the scandal is McGuinty not listening to voters in the first place, starting to build plants in an area no one wanted them built in, waiting until he was at risk of losing his job before finally listening to people, but by then it was too late and the whole project is costing us money and wasting time.

If it isn't scandal then it is simple negligence. Either way, the government fucked up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
Bottom line is that direct penalties for moving the gas plants is around $230-250 million. It isn't scandal, its just a cost of moving the plants.
The fact that plants have to be moved in the first place is scandalous. Someone did something incorrectly and now we have a mess to clean up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
It will cost another $200-250 million to build new transmission lines from Bath as opposed to the local infrastructure in Oakville, and this is going to be shared among all Ontario Power ratepayers as an infrastructure upgrade that will last generations and generations into the future.
Which is a huge scandal in the north, actually, since we're not properly connected to the Ontario energy grid. The amount of energy that can be transferred from North to South is negligible (to the point that while Southern Ontario has black outs, we have to turn off plants to prevent overloading the system with excess power). We'll pay for it without benefiting from it, all while needing but not getting out own energy infrastructure upgrades. We need new high voltage corridors to the far north for the mining boom and the province has barely done any planning for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
The taxpayer is footing the $200 million bill for the move, ratepayers are footing the $200 million for transmission lines.
Ontarians are paying a $400 million bill for a Government fuck-up.

The rate payers aren't in Ohio! They're in Ontario, and they're paying taxes to the government. Every home has a hydro bill and every home has people paying taxes in some form. This adds up to a high cost that it placed on our shoulders to pay for a government mistake that wouldn't have happened this way if government had simply listened to the people in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon716 View Post
This whole "scandal" could be come out to be a net savings if they decide not to go nuclear.
Nuclear energy provides about half of Southern Ontario's energy. We'd have to build a lot of natural gas plants to replace them. I would be really surprised if that ends up saving money in the long run.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2012, 6:10 AM
Dr Nevergold Dr Nevergold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 20,104
You are underestimating how hard it is to govern. Those plants should be in Mississauga and Oakville as intended, but nimby protests and the need to win elections gets in the way. It doesn't matter if its ndp or conservative or liberal, when there is that much opposition to a project a government will react. Since that won't happen they have invested in upgrading existing coal facilities to natural gas, which is the next best thing.

The government didn't know there would be the intense opposition in Oakville and Mississauga, so if you call that incompetence so be it.

I am a huge supporter of getting rid of coal. I think Ontario is headed in the right energy direction despite the setback.

And there is a difference between taxpayers and ratepayers... Ratepayers funds go to hydro budget, tax funds go into government. The distinction is important.

So the question remains, what is the total capital budget for the gas conversion? What percent is the 230 million for canceling the contract out of the entire budget.

Re: nuclear, it will cost tens of billions to build new nuclear and maintain the existing nuclear facilities. They should operate the existing facilities, but focus on new gas generation for new projects. Yes, it is cheaper and gas is abundant.

At the end of the day, cleaner energy is expensive. But Ontario will have to either support it or continue using dirty coal. All this scandal nonsense is a joke... 200 million to build transmission lines is a drop in the hydro bucket. Clean energy is one of the reasons to support the government in my eyes, they do know what they are doing. Politics is messy, when your back is against the wall any party will back down and changes plans. The cynical jabs coming from hudak and horwath and backed by the media will ensure the future of coal generation in Ontario.

Last edited by Dr Nevergold; Nov 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:47 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.