cogito ergo said:
hmmm... Canada in general uses only slightly more energy per capita than Norway.
Canada also is using 2.5 LESS per capita than Island.
Both are rather 'compact' countries by comparison and both are regarded as sensitive to their environment.
I am giving these examples not to promote energy waste, but rather to get some balanced view on where we are.
We are not as wasteful as the 'political green' mantra repeatedly suggests.
In real world the level of energy consumption is reflective on geography(climate zone) or (as a byproduct) on wealth of the country, in general.

BTW Ontario per capita energy use is less then half of that in Saskatchewan or Alberta and is one of the lowest in the country.
Click to expand...

Yes, Canada (9.43 million tons oil-equivalent) uses similar energy per capita as Norway (9.15), but I am afraid Norway is not a shining star among Nordic countries. In fact, it is far higher than any other high latitude countries in Europe.

For example, Sweden: 5.43; Finland: 3.97, Denmark: 3.08. Russia is at 4.77. Doesn't make Canada look that good.

Iceland is off the chart even world wide (world number 1 in energy consumption per capita,), so being lower than Iceland means nothing. To give some explanation, it is because electricity price in Iceland is very competitive because in per capital terms it is the world's largest producer of hydropower, geothermal energy, and electricity in general. Also the tiny size of the country (equivalent to a small city in Canada) can easily skew things due to the nature of its industries.

Off topic, but thought it would be interesting to know.
 
Waterloo_Guy said:
Is that because of the extractive industries in those two provinces? If so, it's hardly a fair comparison. The entire world uses the resources mined from places like this, so our hands are not so clean.
Click to expand...
I don't want to drag the off topic discussion, but I just don't get how the presence of extractive industries affect individual per capita consumption of energy?
Ontario, for example produces almost all nuclear power in Canada, our power should be "almost" free by this logic.
:))
 
cogito ergo said:
I don't want to drag the off topic discussion, but I just don't get how the presence of extractive industries affect individual per capita consumption of energy?
Ontario, for example produces almost all nuclear power in Canada, our power should be "almost" free by this logic.
:))
Click to expand...

I was thinking about the industrial use of energy, not household use. I could well be wrong about this, but I would expect these industries are very energy intensive compared to most of what goes on in Ontario. Industry in general uses a lot of energy. But I'm just spit-balling since I have not seen data on it.
 
Totally OT but - There is also the issue of what kinds of energy we're talking about, and usedin what way - our electricity generation maybe relatively non-polluting (I consider nukes green), but our heating and transportation more than makes up for it.

AoD
 
cogito ergo said:
I don't want to drag the off topic discussion, but I just don't get how the presence of extractive industries affect individual per capita consumption of energy?
Ontario, for example produces almost all nuclear power in Canada, our power should be "almost" free by this logic.
:))
Click to expand...

First of all, my apologies for the late response to your comment.

While the daily operating costs of a nuclear power plant are quite low, the big issue is their upfront capital construction and subsequent refurbishment costs. The one time capital costs are so large that when depreciated over the economic lifespan of the nuclear plants, they dwarf the daily operating costs. As a result, the charges for power produced at the nuclear plants is not 'almost' free, but reflects the daily operating costs plus depreciation charges for the capital costs of the nuclear plants. The same situation exists for the hydro plants - while the daily operating costs are extremely low, the capital costs on construction, including the most recent tunnel to expand the capacity of the Sir Adam Beck Niagara Falls hydro plant, all contribute to the monthly electricity bills we have to pay.

Recent announcements regarding the planned refurbishments of the Bruce nuclear power plan indicated a future contract rate in the order of 6 cents per kWH and the OPG refurbishment of the Darlington plant indicated a future rate in the order of 8 cents per kWH, in order to cover their direct operating costs along with the capital costs of the refurbishments. As a side note - the remaining Pickering plant reactors are not being refurbished, but are to be permanently shut down once the Bruce and Darlington reactor refurbishments are complete, in the (if I recall correctly) 2024 timeframe.
 
Last edited:
I happened to walk by today and popped into the sales centre. There's a few units left for sale for the first building (North one on Shuter). Not sure when the next phase will be, but probly soon. Perhaps most of it was already pre-sold on some VIP sales event? The sales centre is TINY though.

What stood out to me is that some of the units will have enclosed balconies courtesy of lumon.com which I think is excellent. I've been thinking of taking to my condo board about getting my balcony enclosed too. They are $$ though.
 
Agreed - the semi enclosed balcony system from Lumon is a real selling feature - especially given Toronto's weather. It makes much more sense to have a 3 season balcony...especially, given the price per square foot of interior space. I see an unit (assignment sale) at Nearby 68 Shutter (Core Condos) #2505 is asking $599k for 725 sqft with parking = $826 a foot. Also #2302 a 1 bedroom no parking 535 sqft for $388k = $725 a foot === prices are on the rise it seems. Impressive asking prices -- I will let the board know when any sales go thru. Thx
 
Last edited:
I lied, I got pics (though only after walking past again). Only the north half of the lot is closed, the part by Queen is still open. This weather today is miserable, so apologies if it's not the best shot..


IMG_8813.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_8813.JPG
    IMG_8813.JPG
    1,011.2 KB · Views: 701
I love it. This was one of the most offensive surface lots in all of downtown.
 
Freddy said:
This parking lot has been a blight on Toronto for decades tooooo long. Glad to see it start to disappear.
Click to expand...

Yes. This project should go a long way to cleaning up the area especially towards Queen and Sherbourne which to me is a mess.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top