In their defense, it wasn't Metrolinx that suggested, nor wanted the plant - although they certainly didn't see anything wrong with it.

The plant wasn't just for a catastrophic power outage event, either.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Gas plants are clean and neighbourhood friendly? That would be news to residents in Oakville and Mississauga. If only Dalton had known that ;-)

If the proponent was other than ML, and ML bought in, they were played. The case for a local power plant that just happens to feed transit as well as other needs, and can be used in a focussed way during a grid failure, makes sense - but ought to be justified and environmentally qualified on its own merits. Pretty crafty proponent who put ML up to breaking trail for them.

I doun't know much about battery technology but storage banks are all the rage these days. If the duty cycle is not constant charge/discharge, but just readines for infrequent discharge, you don't need much of a power source to charge it - just like filling the small town water tower with a garden hose, because the fire department only fights a fire once or twice a month.

- Paul
 
I take this to mean that the plant would be used in situations where only part of the city had lost power, correct?

I'm positive that somewhere in the Crosstown EA documentation (I'm too lazy to go to the web site and hunt) it was documented that the power distribution system for Crosstown has the ability to feed the entire route from multiple points around the city. So yes, if the power goes out in the east the plant can compensate.... but so could the grid from the western feed point (which is at Keelish, IIRC). If the power goes out closer to the plant, the grid can supply from the east.

- Paul
 
I take this to mean that the plant would be used in situations where only part of the city had lost power, correct?

I thought all existing TTC subway had this kind of thing too; though just enough for trains to creep to the next station and keep the lights on until everybody is out and stations are locked.
 
I'm worried that the battery technology they plan to use are for the lowest-bidder current technology of batteries. Look at the problems the TTC is having upgrading the signal system from the 1950's then state-of-the-art to the current state-of-the-art. Hopefully, we will be able to upgrade the system for better, smaller, and longer lasting battery technology that they are working on now, and for the future.

For example:

Lithium-ion creator helped develop a better battery technology
It's safer, can store more energy and can last much longer.

From link:

At 94 years old, John B. Goodenough isn't done changing the landscape of battery technology. The University of Texas at Austin professor who's widely credited for the invention of lithium-ion batteries has developed a better alternative. Goodenough, Cockrell School senior research fellow Maria Helena Braga and their team have created a low-cost solid state battery that's safer than lithium-ion. It stores thrice as much energy, which means more miles for electric vehicles in between charges. When you do need to charge, it can be done minutes instead of hours. Plus, it can withstand a greater number of charge and discharge cycles.

The team's technology uses glass electrolytes instead of liquid like lithium-ion does. By using solid glass, the new battery won't form dendrites -- whisker-like pieces of lithium that usually form in liquid electrolytes. They're the reason lithium-ion batteries have the tendency to short circuit and explode or start a fire.

The glass electrolytes also make it possible for the battery to operate in subzero degree (up to around -20 degrees Celsius or -4 degrees Fahrenheit) weather. And since their use means the creators replaced lithium with low-cost sodium, the batteries can be manufactured with earth-friendly materials. Someday, the new technology could make EVs more common and change the way we use our gadgets. For now, Goodenough and his team are looking to pair up with battery makers who can test their creation in electric vehicles and energy storage devices.​
 
I take this to mean that the plant would be used in situations where only part of the city had lost power, correct?

Not......quite.

It looks/sounds like the operator was trying to build the plant as a money-making venture - selling the power back to Hydro One during peak demand times. The cover was that it was also going to be a back-up generator for the Crosstown.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
Not......quite.

It looks/sounds like the operator was trying to build the plant as a money-making venture - selling the power back to Hydro One during peak demand times. The cover was that it was also going to be a back-up generator for the Crosstown.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

And that, folks, is why it's beyond the scope of the transit project. That makes it a power generation facility.
 
I thought all existing TTC subway had this kind of thing too; though just enough for trains to creep to the next station and keep the lights on until everybody is out and stations are locked.
I believe the trains have a limited back up battery on them for that situation but if they lose power they just cost if they can.
 
I believe the trains have a limited back up battery on them for that situation but if they lose power they just cost if they can.

I don't believe that to be true. In the blackout of 2003, people had to evacuate through the tunnels. TTC does use backup batteries, but they're only used to light tunnels temporarily, so people can walk to a station or an emergency exit

"During the blackout, emergency generators and batteries kept emergency evacuation lighting active in the tunnels allowing staff to perform safe, orderly evacuations of passengers from the tunnels. The effectiveness of training of employees involved was evident in the way they calmly performed evacuations, manned communications and controlled facilities and deployed emergency equipment. Emergency back-up batteries provided lighting to allow evacuation from subway stations to the surface. Emergency generators powered the "heart" of the TTC, the Transit Control Centre, allowing radio communications with staff in the field and continual monitoring and control of vital systems such as the traction power distribution system."

https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Co...03/Oct_22_2003/Other/The_Blackout_Of_Augu.jsp
 
Not......quite.

It looks/sounds like the operator was trying to build the plant as a money-making venture - selling the power back to Hydro One during peak demand times. The cover was that it was also going to be a back-up generator for the Crosstown.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

My impression is that:
1) There was a requirement for emergency power in the event of an outage
2) The bidding took into account the electricity costs of each proposal, in an attempt to incentivize innovative and energy-saving features.

As a result of 1) and 2) and of Ontario's sky-high electricity prices, the winning bid had a power plant as part of it.
 
My impression is that:
1) There was a requirement for emergency power in the event of an outage
2) The bidding took into account the electricity costs of each proposal, in an attempt to incentivize innovative and energy-saving features.

As a result of 1) and 2) and of Ontario's sky-high electricity prices, the winning bid had a power plant as part of it.

That seems to be the long-and-the-short of it, yes.

Dan
Toronto, Ont
 
Gas plants are clean and neighbourhood friendly? That would be news to residents in Oakville and Mississauga. If only Dalton had known that ;-)

My condo has a gas generator for backup power. Kept the elevators running during the blackout back 10-15 years ago. All depends on the size.
 
I took some (probably not the greatest) pictures of the Mount Dennis MSF and station today from the GO train. MSF structure is starting to go up. They're also working within the rail corridor so anyone on the Kitchener Line is slowed down near the future station.

20170518_155108.jpg
20170518_155111.jpg
20170518_155115.jpg
20170518_155129.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20170518_155108.jpg
    20170518_155108.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 694
  • 20170518_155111.jpg
    20170518_155111.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 717
  • 20170518_155115.jpg
    20170518_155115.jpg
    934.3 KB · Views: 666
  • 20170518_155129.jpg
    20170518_155129.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 630
Any indications on how LRVs are going to be delivered from Millhaven? In some renderings there was indication of a delivery track off the CP line, but now the LRVs are being built near a CN line. Interchange to CP? Truck them in from MacMillan? Something else?
 
Any indications on how LRVs are going to be delivered from Millhaven? In some renderings there was indication of a delivery track off the CP line, but now the LRVs are being built near a CN line. Interchange to CP? Truck them in from MacMillan? Something else?

CN and CP run parallel at Mt Dennis, with CP being on the northeast side. I'd imagine that's where the delivery track you're referring to would be?
 

Back
Top