Jonny5
Senior Member
"We need more study".
That's what came up on the wheel of spin phrases.
That's what came up on the wheel of spin phrases.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Ervin
- Start date
Admiral Beez
Superstar
The oil sands have nothing to do with electricity generation in Ontario. Our power comes from Hydro, nuclear, coal and natural gas - if you want to reduce or eliminate any of these you need to find a viable alternative. Is that windmills? How many windmills does it take to reliably replace the power of Pickering nuclear station?
W. K. Lis
Superstar
There is waste heat recovery systems that could use the wasted heat generated by industry to power electricity. However, there are those who would be opposed to even that (IE. David Miller).
To make cement, for example, requires a lot of heat. The heat is now just pumped out the smokestacks instead of being used for generating electricity. Steel mills could also generate electricity if they could get approval.
China is one country, for example, that does. See this link.
To make cement, for example, requires a lot of heat. The heat is now just pumped out the smokestacks instead of being used for generating electricity. Steel mills could also generate electricity if they could get approval.
China is one country, for example, that does. See this link.
Last edited:
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Currently, oil is refined to run vehicles, heat homes etc. and is a finite resource. If we were forward thinking wind and sun could be harnessed to run electric cars, power homes etc. and could reduce/replace nuclear, coal and gas in the future plus there's no shortage of it.
In the UK there's a crematorium that redirects wasted heat to warm a nearby swimming pool. Seems like an odd thing to do but it's resourceful.
doady
Senior Member
It was the slippery slope: you started pandering to NIMBY, they continue to ask for more. 5km limit becomes total ban. Sad.
Wind could have easily replaced nuclear-based base load generation in Ontario. Peak load generation from gas/coal, maybe not so much.
I guess Ontario will have to stick with natural gas expansion. Oh wait, NIMBYs protest that too (see Clarkson/Oakville). So I guess Ontario have to import coal-based electricity from south of the Great Lakes and assume that coal plants that line shores the Great Lakes south of the border have absolutely no effect on the air quality for the people of Ontario.
I wonder what's McGuinty's next step to say in power? Massive tax cuts plus downloading onto municipalities? That would score a lot of political points with average pea-brained Ontario resident for sure.
Wind could have easily replaced nuclear-based base load generation in Ontario. Peak load generation from gas/coal, maybe not so much.
I guess Ontario will have to stick with natural gas expansion. Oh wait, NIMBYs protest that too (see Clarkson/Oakville). So I guess Ontario have to import coal-based electricity from south of the Great Lakes and assume that coal plants that line shores the Great Lakes south of the border have absolutely no effect on the air quality for the people of Ontario.
I wonder what's McGuinty's next step to say in power? Massive tax cuts plus downloading onto municipalities? That would score a lot of political points with average pea-brained Ontario resident for sure.
gristle
Senior Member
There is a shortage of sunlight every night. At its best, any given wind farm is only efficient about 20% of the time.
You will still need something like nuclear for baseload supply for some time to come.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Yes, and when it becomes either too scarce or expensive to utilize for those purposes we'll use or invent something else. Before we had oil our vehicles were powered by coal, wind and grains, our homes were heated by coal, wood or animal oils (including whale fat).
I believe wind, solar, tidal, and thermal collection methods will play a big place in the future, but the greatest increase will be in nuclear energy. Only nuclear energy will be able to produce the power needed to create hydrogen for fuel cells, and the huge electricity demands of industry, transportation, home heating, etc.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
If people have a problem with windmills, wait until more nuclear plants are proposed and see what happens.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Put the nuclear plants and the windmills on Hudson's Bay or another distant, largely uninhabited part of Ontario, pay off the natives, and you won't hear a thing.
gristle
Senior Member
Put a new-build nuclear facility right on the land where the the present Darlington facility is located. There is plenty of room for a four or even eight reactors station. There is ready access to the hydro grid, so no major cost associated with installing that.
Don't bank on hydrogen fuel cells. Barring some very major developments in materials technologies and a positively massive effort and expense in building a hydrogen infrastructure, you are not going to see hydrogen fuel cell cars.
Don't bank on hydrogen fuel cells. Barring some very major developments in materials technologies and a positively massive effort and expense in building a hydrogen infrastructure, you are not going to see hydrogen fuel cell cars.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Pay off the natives? Are you serious?
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
That is what always happens. The Oakville plant is going to a reserve in Norfolk County ON
Bogtrotter
Senior Member
Well it's not what 'always' happens by any means, but it has been a solution in some parts of North America and is particularly desirable for companies in the US as native land provides a tax haven for private companies. I have no problem with this as long as the respective native communities elect to have them.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Why not? They generally have ownership to much of the land, and even if they don't have ownership of the land, they will generally be the biggest complainers and obstructionists. There is a big pipeline going in across the NWT I believe, and financial compensation to the native bands in the affected areas was key to the project proceeding. Money always talks.
freshcutgrass
Senior Member
Wind & solar are very sexy sounding. But as you mentioned, they do not work 24/7, and their capital costs and life span/maintenance are not cost effective. There is also the issue of "looking" at them (either you like them...or you don't).
There's a green technology that has been around for a long time, and has a proven track record...geothermal (or to be more accurate...geoexchange).
It works the same 24 hrs/day, 365 days a year. It can provide 100% of the heating and cooling needs of a building, and most of the domestic hot water needs (the vast majority of the average homes energy requirement). The loop is underground, so there is nothing to look at. Once installed, a geothermal loop requires no maintenance and lasts virtually forever.
The other big advantage to Geo, is one people don't usually think about...it doesn't impact on the grid system to deliver power, because it is self-contained. People get all caught up in the tremendous billions of dollars to build nuclear and coal fired generating stations, that they forget about the billions it costs to build and upgrade the massive grid system to deliver all this extra power.
According to Statcan, 15.9% of the homes in Ontario use electricity as their primary source of heating. If just these homes were converted to Geo, the energy savings would be great enough to lower the load enough to prevent an entire nuclear station from being built, plus the savings on upgrading the grid delivery system.
Solar and wind is sexy, and on everyone's mind...geothermal is not sexy, and therefore the average person has never even heard of it, and less understand it. Currently, the Feds are giving $3500 grants for installing it, and the Ont govt is matching it for a total of $7000.