Site C

[butcher99]

But I would say we have beaten the crap out of this.

I agree, we have, and I can't believe that you still don't get it. I make my living on big gearboxes (reducers if you prefer) and I will tell you in no uncertain terms, that the planetary boxes in those wind turbines will be rebuilt every 25,000 hours at the outside. The boxes I work on are a little smaller (only 500 to 1000kW), and they are about 35-50k$ parts only per rebuild. Factor in your oil changes of 250-300 l of gearlube every 5000 hours, I don't know what they got for main bearings on the house or rotor head. These things are a millwright's dream. Cha-ching, talk about high maintenance and remote locations. Yay !! Away pay !!

edit to add a zero i missed on oil chg hours

So Hydro generators have no bearings? Never break down? Never need repairs?

All costs in wind is cheaper. Look it up. Not only is it cheaper it is getting even cheaper.
You need to quit beating this dead horse.

[butcher99]

butcher - wind and solar are NOT cheaper. We provide tons of data and you just keep spouting IPP and wind and solar industry garbage propaganda.

Did you actually look at the "California demand goose" I posted, the page 55? Do you have any clue what that means?

Plus your info on Ontario electricity rates is out of whack. This: https://issuu.com/hydroquebec/docs/comp_2016_en?e=1151578/39216309

The rates I quoted are the new rates as of July 2017. Look them up. Instead of going to Quebec Hydro and looking at last years rates try this years rates.
Site C will lead to BC paying even higher rates than Ontario. As wind continues to get even cheaper Ontario will reap the benefit.

[Carrs Landing Viking]

we do not want or need site c . only a fool would suggest we do

Speak for yourself Removed.

[Urban Cowboy]

we do not want or need site c . only a fool would suggest we do

Speak for yourself fool.

"We" being used here as if it's something more than a handful of NDP crackpots in the club.

[hobbyguy]

butcher - wind and solar are NOT cheaper. We provide tons of data and you just keep spouting IPP and wind and solar industry garbage propaganda.

Did you actually look at the "California demand goose" I posted, the page 55? Do you have any clue what that means?

Plus your info on Ontario electricity rates is out of whack. This: https://issuu.com/hydroquebec/docs/comp_2016_en?e=1151578/39216309

The rates I quoted are the new rates as of July 2017. Look them up. Instead of going to Quebec Hydro and looking at last years rates try this years rates.
Site C will lead to BC paying even higher rates than Ontario. As wind continues to get even cheaper Ontario will reap the benefit.

As usual you take the denier position.

Misquote and misinterpret the reality. Ontario has joined the rest of the fools who got sucked in by wind and solar advocates and is massively subsidizing the new rates. https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2017/05/24/hydro-rate-cut-will-ultimately-cost-21b-watchdog-warns.html

"In a 15-page report released Wednesday, Financial Accountability Officer Stephen LeClair said the scheme will cost the province $45 billion over the next 29 years while saving ratepayers $24 billion for a $21-billion net expense.

But LeClair warned his estimates are only applicable if “the province is able to achieve and maintain a balanced budget over 29 years.” The cost of the subsidy could balloon to between $69 billion and $93 billion if the government has to borrow to pay for it."


Any idiot can make electricity rates look better if you subsidize it. This massive subsidy program will drive up Ontario's deficit just to mask the gawdawful uniformed decision to buy into the wind subsidy mining scam.

Open your eyes - you are being sucked in. Ontario has already spent billions and billions futzing around with wind subsidies, and now they are going blow a minimum of another $45 billion and as much as $93 billion on electricity rate subsidies to cover up their massive blunder.

It is height of silliness. Wind and solar just don't work for grid electricity. They are far too expensive and they mess up the grid.

If they weren't you could stop posting rubbish and answer the challenge:

Please post a link to windy-solar non synchronous grid jurisdiction that has abundant, renewable, reliable, and affordable electricity without subsidies.

You can't because it isn't possible and that renders everything you post nonsense.

[Merry]

There is lots of evidence to show wind and solar can provide all the power we need.

Please produce this "evidence"; I'd like to see it.

They have dual rates where you pay more for power used in peak times. Probably a better system than what we have if you want to save power.

My daughter lives in Ontario, and the lowest power rate is at such inconvenient times it's practically useless (unless you like doing your laundry at midnight).

Suddenly Ontarios hydro does not look all that bad.

When I saw the size of my daughter's Hydro Bill I was shocked. It is way higher than what we pay.

You want a lower power bill in Ontario you just turn down the electric heat during the high times or don't use the dish washer. Run it later.

When it's 40 below outside in January, and your trying to watch TV in the evening after a hard day's work, I doubt you want to "turn down your heat".

BTW, Ontario just lowered its rates.

Only because the Government subsidized the rates a little to try to stem the public outcry. But, even with the subsidy, their rates are still higher than ours.

[erinmore3775]

GEE WHIZ...ARE ONTARIO ELECTRICAL RATES REALLY CHEAPER AS A RESULT OF THEIR MOVE TO SWEG?

The current regulated electricity rates charged to Ontario hydro customers for the period May 1, 2017, to Oct 31, 2017

http://www.ontario-hydro.com/current-rates

This website allows you to discover your "current time of day electrical rate" in Ontario.

https://www.oeb.ca/rates-and-your-bill/electricity-rates

Using these sites residents of Ontario can determine the "best" time to do your laundry or your baking since most Ontario homes have electric water heater, electric clothes dryers, and electric stoves. As you can see, those on a fixed income are better to do these activities between 7 PM and 7 AM. Smart Meters ensure that electrical rates are recorded within in minutes of use.

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/05/11/ontario-hydro-rates-to-soar-liberal-document

This Toronto Sun article explains the 25% cuts to residential electrical rates and estimated future rates. It is important to note that the rate reduction (from General Tax Revenues) ends in 2022 and then the rates begin to climb. This rate reduction is a subsidy.

The electrical rates and the carbon footprint of Ontario will continue to be higher than those of BC for quite a considerable time. If any contributor is interested in the costs and debate surrounding keeping the Napanee and the Lennox thermal generators on stream to be synchronous back-ups to the nuclear and SWEG of the Hydro One system please examine the following.

https://www.ospe.on.ca/public/documents/presentations/real-cost-electrical-energy.pdfImportant to examine pages 18 through 30. Unfortunately, most of these figures are based on 2011 numbers and as a result will need to be increased as a minimum by inflation)

https://www.oeb.ca/sites/default/files/wholesale_market_price_forecast_20170420.pdf(Wholesale electric rates Ontario)

http://www.opg.com/generating-power/thermal/Pages/thermal.aspx(Thermal production in Ontario)

https://www.transcanada.com/en/operations/power/napanee-project/

It should be noted, that Hydro One is in a state of flux at the moment. A political decision closed many gas thermal plants in a move to IPP SWEG. It cost taxpayers and ratepayers millions. Court cases abound. I sincerely hope that some contributors are not suggesting that BC follow the model of Ontario and Hydro One and their move to SWEG.

[hobbyguy]

erinmore, every single windy-solar grid jurisdiction initiative has resulted in huge increases in electricity rates.

IF it weren't for silly inter-provincial squabbles and politics, Ontario would have been waaay better off to help NL&L pay for a transmission line from Muskrat Falls to Ontario, and bought power from them - it would also have negated the need for the Newfoundland to Nova Scotia underwater transmission system (which is an enormously costly part of the Muskrat Falls project).

The other option would have been to just buy power from Quebec - but the silly Ontario politicians got sucked in by the windy-solar lobby groups and thought that would be cheaper. Sigh - Ontario got completely hosed and now the "green" jobs that Ontario was subsidizing are going and gone, and at the same time they are floating a $45 billion subsidy (possibly as high $93 billion) to cover up the fact that they got conned by the wind industry.

Let's see, Ontario's wind industry needs a $45 billion subsidy to keep consumers out of dire energy poverty.... site C costs $9 billion and will produce electricity that doesn't need stupid TOU pricing and any subsidies from taxpayers... and our rates will continue to be cheaper than Ontario.

Hmmm... site C $9 billion, alternative $45 billion subsidy + high TOU rates... tough choice

[Urban Cowboy]

I sincerely hope that some contributors are not suggesting that BC follow the model of Ontario and Hydro One and their move to SWEG.

That's exactly what they are suggesting, what's in question is whether they are doing so innocently oblivious, because math is hard for the NDP faithful, or simply because they'll stoop to any level to spite the Liberals, including cutting their own noses off.

For certain many have gone to great lengths to explain why Site C is a good investment, and well supported their position, while the opposition resorts to what one can only characterize as creative accounting, to justify their stand.

How can you take people who don't grasp the true meaning of "subsidy" seriously?

[Smurf]

I just can't believe that with all the information that is available people are still fooled by the wind/solar propaganda. There is no real world proof for any of it.

[Urban Cowboy]

I just can't believe that with all the information that is available people are still fooled by the wind/solar propaganda. There is no real world proof for any of it.

I'm far more shocked by how many don't get the meaning of subsidy, nor the impact it has on this whole equation, regardless of where in the world you live.

We've got one using Ontario as an example of something enviable, yet they pay far more than us, plus in whatever crafty ways the government dreams up, they will also be footing the bill for billions in subsidies implemented to bring the cost of their electric down. There is no free lunch so obviously the tax payers are on the hook for these billions in subsidies.

Some might call it robbing Peter to pay Paul.

[Smurf]

The sad part is voters will fall for it because their hydro rates went down, LOL.

[Urban Cowboy]

The sad part is voters will fall for it because their hydro rates went down, LOL.

True enough.

All one has to do is read this thread, to note how blissfully ignorant some are to the real facts, and the true bottom line regarding cost.

Obviously the clueless are distributed in amongst, with some in positions of clout, or Ontario wouldn't have bought into the windy pie in the sky spiel.

[flamingfingers]

Deloitte seems to have cast a case for re-thinking costs involved with Site C:

Deloitte report into alternatives to Site C released by BCUC
September 11, 2017 Chris Newton Energy News, News, Site C Comments Off on Deloitte report into alternatives to Site C released by BCUC

VANCOUVER, B.C. — The second of two reports written by Deloitte LLP for the BC Utilities Commission examining alternatives to the Site C dam appears to show that there are several alternatives that are cheaper, though no final recommendation is given.

In the report, Deloitte states that between 1964 and 2016, BC Hydro actually overestimated future electricity demand in B.C. 77 percent of the time. The rate of overestimating demand by BC Hydro has increased in the last ten years since the late-2000’s worldwide recession.

Deloitte also compared the price of other forms of renewable and non-renewable forms of electricity generation, and its ability to serve as a constant or intermittent source of generation. In their comparison, Deloitte concluded that even other alternative forms of electricity generation such as Geothermal and Biomass cost $7,300 per kilowatt, less than Site C’s capital cost of $7,636 per kilowatt.

Read the rest:
https://energeticcity.ca/2017/09/deloit ... ased-bcuc/

[mikest2]

Deloitte seems to have cast a case for re-thinking costs involved with Site C:

Deloitte report into alternatives to Site C released by BCUC
September 11, 2017 Chris Newton Energy News, News, Site C Comments Off on Deloitte report into alternatives to Site C released by BCUC

VANCOUVER, B.C. — The second of two reports written by Deloitte LLP for the BC Utilities Commission examining alternatives to the Site C dam appears to show that there are several alternatives that are cheaper, though no final recommendation is given.

In the report, Deloitte states that between 1964 and 2016, BC Hydro actually overestimated future electricity demand in B.C. 77 percent of the time. The rate of overestimating demand by BC Hydro has increased in the last ten years since the late-2000’s worldwide recession.

Deloitte also compared the price of other forms of renewable and non-renewable forms of electricity generation, and its ability to serve as a constant or intermittent source of generation. In their comparison, Deloitte concluded that even other alternative forms of electricity generation such as Geothermal and Biomass cost $7,300 per kilowatt, less than Site C’s capital cost of $7,636 per kilowatt.

Read the rest:
https://energeticcity.ca/2017/09/deloit ... ased-bcuc/

Given the fracking needed, lifespan for geothermal, and the cost of transmission lines, we would have to look really hard at the numbers Deloitte is using.
Personally I'm a little iffy on biomass, I have always wondered if it's better to let the methane escape slowly, or accelerate fermentation, and burn the methane to generate thermal power. I wonder if they factored in the upcoming carbon tax increases ?