Canadian Money Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This is not common. Right now Wind plus a tiny contribution from biofuels are producing more power than Hydro in Ontario. It's possible that Hydro is undergoing some maintenance, because otherwise, why run the gas plants?

Rectangle Font Material property Parallel Screenshot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,863 Posts
When the wind stops blowing, the output of wind is zero, but hydro is constant, just as nuclear is. Gas plants are able to run up quickly to take up when the wind stops. It would be great if they could store the electricity that wind produces, but until then they need gas to back it up.

ltr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Heading into fall, dont draw down all the water, because a lot of smaller water sources freeze in the winter, so need to keep big open body of waters ready to run over the winter.
I would think that drawing less water through the hydro plants would just result in more water flowing over the Falls ;)

Ontario has a net export of power at the moment, and the amount is about the same as what is being produced from the gas plants. I think I read that they have been doing upgrades and maintenance at Niagara Falls, so that is perhaps why the output there is a bit on the low side. Could be same for nuclear. Getting ready for winter, just like the rest of us!. The Saunders hydro facility at Cornwall is almost flat out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
833 Posts
Yes, maintenance can be a factor. I have spent a few weeks puling leaves out of window wells and clearing gutter, even though they are screened.

I can just imagine the effort involved to clear the intake trash racks at big hydro generating stations. Nice thing for that type of asset is once you build it, major maintenance is low and overall life asset is often longer than 70 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
Hydro is renewable in my books.
Well, yes it is. As you are well aware, I was just comparing Hydro with the newer renewable sources.

Right now in Ontario, wind generation is still high. Ratio of output of "new" renewables to hydro still about 50/50 (19.4% to 20%). Gas @ 12% a bit above amount exported.

It is kind of neat to see that almost all of our Ontario energy is produced without need for fossil fuels. A lot better than the coal fired stations we had when I was young!

With the push to EVs and heat pumps, will new wind & solar farms be developed in Ontario? (Current Ford government shut down most projects soon after they were elected). If not, incremental power to charge the EVs and run the heat pumps will have to come from numerous gas fired stations that we have sitting idle. Does that make any sense? Maybe nuclear expansion?

What are other provinces doing about increasing renewable power generation to meet future green energy demand?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,298 Posts
It is kind of neat to see that almost all of our Ontario energy is produced without need for fossil fuels. A lot better than the coal fired stations we had when I was young!
When were you young?

We've been mostly nuclear for decades.

Also we desperately need the fossil fuel power, it's the only one that really adjusts with demand.
Look at the time of day supply with each.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
When were you young?

We've been mostly nuclear for decades.

Also we desperately need the fossil fuel power, it's the only one that really adjusts with demand.
Look at the time of day supply with each.
You have not being paying attention. Better to check the facts before posting contradictory comments. I have been around for a lot longer than most here.

In Ontario our power comes mainly from nuclear, hydro, wind plus some gas fired generation. The latter has quite high capacity, but only represents about 6% of actual production. It is primarily used to balance production with demand when wind is low or as appears to be happening now, when maintenance is being done on nuclear and hydro.

Gas fired stations can be ramped up and down more easily that nuclear or hydro. Often a good part of that additional balancing power gets exported.

In 2001, Ontario had five coal-fired generating stations, comprised of 19 units totalling about 8,800 MW.

In 2003, Ontario committed to phase out coal-fired electricity entirely. That same year, the province announced that it would close Lakeview Generating Station (GS) (2,400 MW).

Ontario’s commitment to eliminate all of its coal-fired generation was enacted in a phased approach. Lakeview GS (2,400 MW) ceased operations in 2005, followed by Atikokan GS (211 MW) in 2012, Lambton GS (1,980 MW) and Nanticoke GS (3,940 MW) in 2013 and Thunder Bay GS (306 MW) in 2014.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,298 Posts
You have not being paying attention. Better to check the facts before posting contradictory comments. I have been around for a lot longer than most here.

In Ontario our power comes mainly from nuclear, hydro, wind plus some gas fired generation. The latter has quite high capacity, but only represents about 6% of actual production. It is primarily used to balance production with demand when wind is low or as appears to be happening now, when maintenance is being done on nuclear and hydro.

Gas fired stations can be ramped up and down more easily that nuclear or hydro. Often a good part of that additional balancing power gets exported.
Interesting, you suggest I check the facts, then you continue to repeat my claims.

The reality is Ontario has had a large nuclear portion for decades, and mostly not fossil fuel for decades as well.
And as you repeated the fossil fuels are used to "balance production", or as I said " we desperately need the fossil fuel power, it's the only one that really adjusts with demand. "
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,863 Posts
And as you repeated the fossil fuels are used to "balance production", or as I said " we desperately need the fossil fuel power, it's the only one that really adjusts with demand. "
Yep, you literally said the exact same thing.

Until they find a way to efficiently store power, it seems like a pretty big waste to have two complete systems available as a result of one of them being intermittent (Wind + Gas). When the wind doesn't blow, they have to quickly fire up the gas plants, since as Matt says, "it's the only one that really adjusts with demand". When the wind is blowing, they dial the gas plant back. The costs of maintaining two systems doesn't do anyone any favours. Maybe someday, they'll figure out a way to store power. The present methods are a bit pie in the sky.

ltr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 · (Edited)
Interesting, you suggest I check the facts, then you continue to repeat my claims.

The reality is Ontario has had a large nuclear portion for decades, and mostly not fossil fuel for decades as well.
You implied that I was wrong in saying we had coal fired stations when I was young? This was 100% true.

Nuclear power only started to become a factor in the 70s. I was around a long time before that and coal was the primary source then other than hydro. Nanticoke was one of the largest coal fired plants anywhere at 4000MW (larger than Pickering nuclear). It only shut down in 2013 less than 1 decade ago.

As usual, you contradict or dispute just about anything anyone posts. Don't bother replying - Last time I will read your unfriendly, rude and often totally incorrect posts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,298 Posts
You implied that I was wrong in saying we had coal fired stations when I was young? This was 100% true.
Actually I asked a question, because without knowing the timeframe, I can't collect the facts.
The question was "When were you young?"

We've been mostly non fossil fuel for decades.
You've got to be quite old for them to make up the majority of Ontario production, but since I don't know when you were young I can't bring up facts now can I?


As usual, you contradict or dispute just about anything anyone posts. Last time I will read your unfriendly, rude and often totally incorrect posts.
Sorry that my directness is "unfriendly and rude".
Maybe it's a bit of frustration from people making claims without data to make a point?

Totally incorrect?
Canada has been mostly "green"/not fossil fuel electricity generation for a while now, like since 1919. But I don't have older data.
Sure we had coal, but it's never really been all that substantial in the grand scheme of things. It's been at most a large minority of our production.

But yes, I'm a bit blunt and assertive, but you called me "totally incorrect", which considering you didn't even extend the courtesy of identifying what you disagree with, is itself quite rude.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top