Let's do some McGuinty math, according to the province it costs OPG 5cents per kWh to produce nuclear power, McGuinty agreed to pay Samsung 14.7 cents/kWh which we end up selling for 2.4 cents/kWh to Michigan, New York etc because we have a surplus when it windy or too sunny. We then have our hydro rates almost doubled since 2007 and then he blows 1billion on 2 bullshit plants that get scrapped to save his ass in an election.
Ontario electricity price hike...again.
- Thread starter elmo
- Start date
Doesn't add up,...or down
Would appreciate some one with factual knowledge, regarding what I understand is,...that excess power available at off peak times, being given away, or sold for next to nothing.
IF,...this is the case,...why would the off peak power rates be going up....???
FAST
Would appreciate some one with factual knowledge, regarding what I understand is,...that excess power available at off peak times, being given away, or sold for next to nothing.
IF,...this is the case,...why would the off peak power rates be going up....???
FAST
This is not even remotely close to the truth and reveals near total ignorance of the economics of power generation on your part.
Ontario has to have enough power to meet peak demand at the busiest time of day on the busiest day of the year. If we don't, we have to buy that power at extreme prices if it is available, or suffer a blackout.
If peak demand rises by ten percent we have to build power plants to meet the increased demand, a fantastically expensive proposition.
Shifting power usage off peak defers the building of new power plants and saves a fantastic amount of money. Thus the cost to provision the marginal watt of power is enormously higher than the cost to provision the average watt.
I agree, we need more nuclear power.
Though I have no problem with green energy sources. Green energy alone isn't going to get us over the line though. Wind or solar can reduce the amount of fossil fuel we burn on good days but we need the power generation capacity every day.
We also need homes to make use of solar power for things like heating up water where the conversion of solar energy to hot water is extremely efficient, use electricity to top up the heat. There are a variety of non electrical energy uses for solar power like that.
Those things are worth doing but we do need nuclear power to provide the backbone of the system that those things can augment.
Try reading the June 27 2013 report by the Independent Electricity operator's report that was published in the Financial Post, (which I'm sure not many Liberal apologist on hear read) and you'll see all the fact and figures as compiled by both them and OPG.
Last edited:
Heard one of the founders of greenpeace speak (Patrick Moore) and he supports Nuclear - overall better for the environment and efficiency.
Well I see that differently. The incentives for green energy are meant to make it unreasonably profitable today, in order to spark the development of an industry that in forty or fifty years will start delivering an efficient solution.
Maybe politically misleading statements have been made about unrealistic short term benefits, but the development of green power technology over the long run is worth spending money on.
Or Europe's. Or Australia's.
I like the fact that Australia's new government gave the pink slip to its climate commissioner. Finally, a government with some smarts.
If that's their goal it's fucking ridiculous. A 40-50 year horizon is absolutely ludicrous. That would be like saying nuclear power doesn't have to be cost effective until just now. The way technology is going, in 40-50 years there will be something completely different.
Yes, in 40 years this initiative will have helped to develop that totally different technology. Long term thinking is rare and should be applauded. But yes the development of efficient alternative energy production is going to take decades and is absolutely necessary.
Fiberals future planning
I have some land in Florida for sale,...
FAST
So we are paying now,...I guess the Fiberals are putting the revenue from this "initiative" in some sort of Trust Fund,... to be used at a later date for some yet to be conceived technology ???
I have some land in Florida for sale,...
FAST
Ontario Hydro is being run by short sighted individuals who've pulled the wool over successive governments for decades, by espousing the benefits of steam powered hydro electric generation and their nuclear program was their gem stone.
Quebec had it right, back in the early 70s, they built their big dam projects on James Bay. This has led to jobs in the North of Quebec, kept their hydro rates low and their utility out of debt and able to fund other big dam projects like the one in Labrador. BC has had larger dams built by industries that have closed shop, but the dams still stand having been taken over by the province and have generated power for the people of BC and so much so that they sold surplus power to California during their crisis. Manitoba completed a big dam project in their northern part, Thompson I believe and upgraded their grid as well. Newfoundland is going ahead with their own project in Muskrat Falls, as Hydro Quebec is reaping most of the profits from the Churchill Falls project in Labrador, which they bank rolled.
Ontarians have been duped by Ontario Hydro by allowing the nuclear debacle to ever take place, then building another one just down the highway. The cost over-runs from the original project should have been a wake up call to stop any new nukes from being built, but they went ahead anyways. Then the refurbishment of Pickering, because Nukes have a life span, which went over budget. Original cost of a little less than $460 million went up to $1.25 billion. The money wasted on nukes also had a ripple effect. With the money wasted on nukes with cost overruns, the grid in Ontario was neglected for many years. The big power outage showed how bad our grid is and how bad nukes are when something like this happens, as nukes just can't be turned on so easy and start generating power. After the big black out Ontario tried to negotiate with Quebec and Manitoba, but because of our poor grid, they were worried about ripple effects, they were turned down, forcing Ontario Hydro to face looking into upgrading the grid in Ontario.
Hydro electrical generation by water and turbine is simplistic, lower maintenance and requires fewer workers to maintain. There is no need for an army of workers to be on staff to be there for maintenance and what ifs. Is the brain trust of Ontario Hydro too smart for their own good? Because dams and turbines are too simple for their PhD and MBA brains, that they have to look for ways to produce power that are more elaborate and difficult to maintain so as to think they are fooling everyone that this is the only way for Ontario and really is their only way of staying employed at a cash cow.
Ontario has big rivers in its northern reaches which could be dammed and hydro electric generating stations built. Putting money and jobs in the north. Hopefully employing aboriginals and getting them off the dole. Taking all the little dams in Ontario that they moth balled after building the nukes and getting them up and running again. Stop wasting money and start saving Ontarians money.
Quebec had it right, back in the early 70s, they built their big dam projects on James Bay. This has led to jobs in the North of Quebec, kept their hydro rates low and their utility out of debt and able to fund other big dam projects like the one in Labrador. BC has had larger dams built by industries that have closed shop, but the dams still stand having been taken over by the province and have generated power for the people of BC and so much so that they sold surplus power to California during their crisis. Manitoba completed a big dam project in their northern part, Thompson I believe and upgraded their grid as well. Newfoundland is going ahead with their own project in Muskrat Falls, as Hydro Quebec is reaping most of the profits from the Churchill Falls project in Labrador, which they bank rolled.
Ontarians have been duped by Ontario Hydro by allowing the nuclear debacle to ever take place, then building another one just down the highway. The cost over-runs from the original project should have been a wake up call to stop any new nukes from being built, but they went ahead anyways. Then the refurbishment of Pickering, because Nukes have a life span, which went over budget. Original cost of a little less than $460 million went up to $1.25 billion. The money wasted on nukes also had a ripple effect. With the money wasted on nukes with cost overruns, the grid in Ontario was neglected for many years. The big power outage showed how bad our grid is and how bad nukes are when something like this happens, as nukes just can't be turned on so easy and start generating power. After the big black out Ontario tried to negotiate with Quebec and Manitoba, but because of our poor grid, they were worried about ripple effects, they were turned down, forcing Ontario Hydro to face looking into upgrading the grid in Ontario.
Hydro electrical generation by water and turbine is simplistic, lower maintenance and requires fewer workers to maintain. There is no need for an army of workers to be on staff to be there for maintenance and what ifs. Is the brain trust of Ontario Hydro too smart for their own good? Because dams and turbines are too simple for their PhD and MBA brains, that they have to look for ways to produce power that are more elaborate and difficult to maintain so as to think they are fooling everyone that this is the only way for Ontario and really is their only way of staying employed at a cash cow.
Ontario has big rivers in its northern reaches which could be dammed and hydro electric generating stations built. Putting money and jobs in the north. Hopefully employing aboriginals and getting them off the dole. Taking all the little dams in Ontario that they moth balled after building the nukes and getting them up and running again. Stop wasting money and start saving Ontarians money.
According to the IESO, so far this year 4.8 terawatts of surplus wind and solar power have been exported to the US at 2.4 C/KWh, while Samsung was paid 13.5 C /kWh to produce it. That adds up to 648 million that we paid for power that we didn't need an sold at a loss of 553 million, and that has been pretty routine according to the IESO. Extrapolate that over the 20 year deal McGuinty made with Samsung and the total will sicken you. We could have built nuclear for that money and produced power as we need it, you can't turn the wind or sun on and off. By 2016, this figure will rise yo 1.5 billion per year with all the wind contract in place. With wind being unreliable there is still a need to build reliable back-up gas generators.....it just keeps getting better with the debacle the liberals created.
The only problem is that there are only a limited number of adequate sites to locate hydroelectric generation.
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
1. Ontario Hydro doesn't even exist anymore.
2. Never believe a word anyone says who somehow thinks that steam powers hydroelectric facilities. That's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
Ontario tapped out the easy hydro locations already, which is why they went nuclear. The temporary natural gas glut we are in now will run down soon enough. Fracked wells don't last that long, when that happens we will be looking for all the power we can find.
Peak oil is real.
Sorry Dirk, but this has to be one of the most misinformed posts I have seen. It would be too easy to ridicule the many inaccuracies in your post and stay factual. First, as was pointed out elsewhere, Ontario Hydro does not exist, and has not existed since April 1, 1998. In addition, for the successor companies of Ontario Hydro like OPG, Hydro One, the IESO, etc, please remember that the sole shareholder of these companies is the Ontario government. Shareholder directives issued by the government typically make little business sense. Not that these companies do everything right, but when the shareholder is an idiot, then stupid things tend to happen.
Second, regarding Quebec getting it right in the 70's. Well sort of. What makes you think that if we had those kind of hydroelectric resources in Ontario that we would not have already developed them? The truth is, the last major hydro development site available in Ontario were developed by the early 70's. Furthermore, those big hydroelectric developments in northern Quebec are the reason Quebec got kicked out of the eastern North America interconnection. Quebec is not synchronous with any of its neighbours because of the instability on the grid caused by having big generation at one end of a long transmission line and all the load at the other end.
Third, the big power outage showed what?? Started in Ohio and wiped out power to 50 million people. Our grid no different than most. Quebec not affected by this one because they are not synchronized with New York, New England, Ontario. Their grid is not so great. Ask Quebeckers how happy they were with their grid during the 1998 Ice Storm. Some were without power for weeks.
Fourth, negotiate what after the power blackout? Nonsense. If our grid is the problem, how does Manitoba or Quebec fix our grid?
Fifth, please name a single which large river in northern Ontario that is untapped and escaped the attention of surveyors and planners of the former Ontario Hydro from as far back as the 1930's. Answer ... none. Are there large rivers in Northern Ontario without hydro dams on them? Yes. The Albany is an obvious one. Why no dams? Because the entire Albany watershed is flat. From the Ministry of the Bleeding Obvious, the water has to drop from a higher elevation to lower elevation to capture the water's potential energy. There are other problems on the Albany such as where to site a dam and building transmission lines over unsuitable terrain. For you to state that building huge hydroelectric on untapped rivers has not been done because it was too simple for the "big brains" at Ontario Hydro .... well that statement is just plain stupid.
Sixth, please name at least one of the mothballed little hydro stations brought back to life by "Ontario Hydro". Standing by.
The gas plants were sited in Mississauga and Oakville to help solve voltage control problems in the west end of the GTA which started with the retirement of the Lakeview generating station in Mississauga. Those plants are still being built ... now on land owned by OPG at Lambton and Lennox.
1. Yes, Quebec still generates a lot of by hydroelectric. An awful lot.
2. Yes, they export to New York and New England, and they wheel through Ontario (in near Cornwall, out at Windsor and Sarnia) into Michigan and beyond. Quebec will be exporting more to New York via an electricity "pipeline" from Chateauguay to Astoria that is in the final stages of approval in New York.
3. Strike a deal with Quebec for all that cheap hydroelectric power they have? Quebec sells at market rates. There are no "deals" to be had with HydroQuebec.
4. Niagara Falls (i.e. the Beck generating stations) still make electricity, more than any other hydro site in Ontario.
