Site C

[Smurf]

I believe here are a lot of people who do not have any understanding of facts, figures and business as a whole. Site C is one of the best things that could happen to our province right now.

[hobbyguy]

I started a thread about environmentalists that have "lost the plot" in the Canada group of threads. The article that leads it off involves Greenpeace essentially admitting in court that they fabricated their whole line of attack against a forestry company.

Not sure about Greenpeace's motivations, whether they are pecuniary or just ideological confabulation, but facts definitely don't matter to them.

I see the same problem with the opposition analysis of site C. They start from a position of "no" and cook up a bunch of stuff that does not withstand scrutiny - but they stick fast to it. Saw that clearly in Bakker's so called business case analysis, where a purportedly qualified academic had to break the rules of academic analysis to cook up a negative report on site C - because if she had followed the rules of academic analysis, her "no" position would have crumbled.

[Urbane]

Many Site C opponents don't seem to acknowledge the amount of money that's already been spent or committed to this project in relation to the total cost. I've quoted him before but it's worth remembering what a vocal opponent of Site C has to say now about completing the dam:

The total costs of building Site C are estimated at $8.3 billion. Excluding interest during construction, the actual expenditures on the project are estimated to total about $7 billion. But of that $7 billion, B.C. Hydro has already spent in excess of $1.5 billion and entered into contract commitments for much more. The remaining costs — the costs B.C. Hydro could avoid by terminating the project, are probably in the order of one half the total cost of the project. The value of Site C supply, even if only sold in export spot markets, is almost certainly going to be worth incurring those remaining costs.
http://vancouversun.com/opinion/opinion ... m-mistakes

Those who agree with Marvin Shaffer that the project was a mistake should also agree with him that it must be completed. You can read the article but he's in the camp of those who believe we don't need all that power for many years to come. I think that's shortsighted given peak power needs, given projected population growth, given the move toward electric vehicles, and given the fact that building costs will never be lower. Interest rates are relatively low now as well. However, I give Shaffer credit for acknowledging that the project is too far along to scrap now and that it would be foolish to consider doing so.

[Urban Cowboy]

Looks like more information to demonstrate why we need Site "C" sooner than later.

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/200406 ... to-plug-in

[George+]

There are many electric cars that can charge themselves while driving.

[Urban Cowboy]

But not the ones that had a part in the 17,000 trips to a charging station.

From the article...

BC Hydro expects the number of electric vehicles in B.C. to increase to about 300,000 in less than 15 years, and Vancouver alone expects to see about 30,000 of the rechargeable cars.

300K more electric cars within the next 15yrs is a significant sum I would say.

[George+]

Right.
So what?

Perhaps they should choose solar rechargeable, or movement rechargeable?

[Smurf]

You should go out and explain that to them .

[mikest2]

Right.
So what?

Perhaps they should choose solar rechargeable, or movement rechargeable?

I suppose you'd charge it with the overhead lights in the parkade ? Give a good read to the first law of thermodynamics, then extrapolate that to what you think your charge rates would be from solar, braking and wind generation from the little windmill on your car, as opposed to what the car requires to start moving and keep moving.

[Urbane]

There are many electric cars that can charge themselves while driving.

Wow! Sounds great! Which brand do you have? What's the cost? An electric car that recharges itself, and there are many of them! After you've told us what brand you have, please provide a link showing the various brands so I can make a choice.

Of course there are no electric vehicles out there that can run just by charging themselves. A quick Google search provides links to a myriad of articles explaining why external charging is necessary. George's claim is just another example of some of the outlandish claims on here. When it comes to energy there is no magic bullet.

[alfred2]

There are many electric cars that can charge themselves while driving.

where can one buy one of your fantasy cars ?

[Urbane]

For George:

An idea that's frequently asked is why can't an electric car charge itself while driving? For example adding a generator to the wheels, or a wind turbine to the top of the car? Or maybe solar panels on the roof. It's an attractive idea isn't it, infinite range just by capturing energy while the car is moving? Unfortunately there are some pesky facts from physics that get in the way.
https://greentransportation.info/energy ... -self.html

[LordEd]

There are many electric cars that can charge themselves while driving.

where can one buy one of your fantasy cars ?

Some hybrids do that turning gas and regenerative braking into electricity.

[Dizzy1]

Screw EVs ... this is where my money is going ...



... stop of at Bed, Bath and Beyond, by myself a nice fitted sheet and couple of broom handles, pop it through the sunroof and I'll be laughing

[Queen K]

Somebody will be laughing for sure.