Where are our farm groups?

[bucket]

Braveheart

One of the outcomes in the list you stated is the reduction in carbon by sequestering.

Getting our share of our contribution to cleaning up others mess is the challenge.

[mustardman]

I think a carbon is the FREE Markets way of convincing a switch to renewables. The tax can be used to pay for them.
The CCS experiment is VERY Expensive and will increase our Power bills X 2

[furrowtickler]

Chuck , that list had to do with profitability, and has nothing to do with reducing carbon output. It just convenient that it fit in.

[mustardman]

http://www.eia.gov/outlooks/…/pdf/electricity_generation.pdf
USA Average Levilized cots of energy (LCOE) for plants coming on stream in 2022 in USA in 2015 $/Mwh. No subsidies included.

Coal with CCS - $139.5
Natural Gas Conventional Combined cycle - $58.1
Natural Gas Advanced Combined cycle -$57.2
Natural Gas CC with CCS -$84.8
Natural Gas Conventional Combustion Turbine - $110.8
Natural Gas Advanced Combustion Turbine - $94.7

Advanced Nuclear - $102.8
Geothermal -$45
Biomass -$96.1

Wind - $64.5
Wind Offshore - $158.1
Solar PV - $84.7
Solar Thermal -$235.9
Hydroelectric -$67.8











www.eia.gov

http://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_generation.pdf



www.eia.gov

[bucket]

Hydro would be easy for Saskatchewan and Alberta. ...there are many sites to reuse the same water downstream to produce power but the environmentalists won't let a dam be built.

[mustardman]

Hydro would be easy for Saskatchewan and Alberta. ...there are many sites to reuse the same water downstream to produce power but the environmentalists won't let a dam be built.

I think buying hydro from Manitoba would be more Cost Effective

[bucket]

Mustard

I agree....but it seems that the water from the mountains could produce 5 times the power cascaded thru the north and south Saskatchewan rivers.


Lakes and power plants rather than flowing it thru without any value.

[mustardman]

Mustard

I agree....but it seems that the water from the mountains could produce 5 times the power cascaded thru the north and south Saskatchewan rivers.


Lakes and power plants rather than flowing it thru without any value.

A few years ago a panel on South Sask River Valley (with one woman From IPCC on it) told a group of us that with climate change the river Flows would become Very inconsistent. little to no sno pack for one thing

[Hamloc]

About a month ago listening to talk radio and they are discussing a recent discovery where C02 can be turned into ethanol,www.energy.gov>articles>scientists-accidentally-turned-C02-into-ethanol. Imagine the market if Canadians could perfect scrubbing C02 from coal plant emissions and then turn that into marketable ethanol. Imagine with all the coal plants in the world what a positive effect this would have on the environment. Then look at what Canada is doing, we're shutting it all down and buying made in China solar panels and bird and bat killers made the USA and Europe. If you had ethanol to sell instead of pumping C02 into the ground it should help the cost of coal generation.

Chuck2 as for your assertion that carbon pricing is the most efficient way to lower carbon, that is true if you let carbon pricing do the work. But Alberta's and the federal government's legislation to shutter coal plants is one example of getting away from letting the tax do the work. If government directs through legislation what changes are made instead of letting the tax and the markets make the choice the cost to consumers is much higher and the tax is much less effective.

[agstar77]

Nikola

Interesting long haul truck, all electric hydrogen fuel cell. Could be the future of ag power units. Nikolaone goes 1200 miles on a fill. Carbon tax money should go towards this type of power for ag.