Why does Ontario’s electricity cost so much? A reality check

[chuckChuck]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/why-does-electricity-cost-so-much-in-ontario/article33453270/

Electricity prices in Ontario have soared in the past decade. Since 2006, the top rate for power has risen four times as fast as inflation.

The problem has aggravated voters, piled on costs for business – particularly factories and other industrial enterprises – and remained one of the most persistent hot buttons for the province’s politicians.

Facing record-low approval ratings, Premier Kathleen Wynne last September announced an 8-per-cent subsidy for residential and small-business bills, which took effect Jan. 1.

How did we get here? How high are electricity prices exactly? How does Ontario compare with other jurisdictions? And what can we do to drive rates down?

The short answer is that a series of policy decisions – most significantly, upgrading infrastructure and signing fixed 20-year deals with private companies to produce electricity – have increased prices over the past decade.

It hasn’t helped the government that a series of controversial decisions, such as cancelling two gas-fired power plants for political reasons and privatizing Hydro One, have intersected with electricity policy and attracted blame for the high prices. While the cancellation of the plants has driven up rates, it’s a relatively small part of the overall increase; the Hydro One privatization, meanwhile, has not yet had an effect.


Best to read the whole article as it covers alot of ground.

[chuckChuck]

Despite the colloquial use of the term “hydro” as a synonym for electricity in Ontario, the province actually uses a mix of sources – not just hydroelectric dams – to get its power.

By far, the largest source of electricity in Ontario is nuclear, accounting for about 60 per cent of the electricity produced in 2015. The province has three nuclear plants: the government-run Darlington and Pickering nuclear generating stations, east of Toronto, and the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station, on Lake Huron, which is run by the private company Bruce Power.

The second-largest source is hydroelectricity, which accounted for 24 per cent of generation in 2015, followed by natural-gas plants (10 per cent) and wind power (6 per cent). Biofuel (which essentially means burning wood pellets) and solar power each provided less than 1 per cent of the province’s power supply.

Generally speaking, the power supply can be divided between “baseload” and “peaking” power. The baseload generation is typically running all the time to provide a steady supply that the province always needs. Peaking power is only switched on when needed.

This difference is what accounts for the gap between installed capacity and actual production. For example, nuclear power (which is part of the baseload) accounts for just 36 per cent of the province’s installed capacity (i.e., the province’s total generating power) but actually produces 60 per cent of the supply. Natural gas, which is mostly used for peaking, accounts for 28 per cent of installed capacity but produces just 10 per cent of the supply.

[Robertbarlage]

The real reason you have people that can't run lemonade stands let alone a province .#getridofthebitch

[mustardman]

If I remember correctly the Bottomless Money Pit of Nuclear plant Expenses and maintenance happened many years ago.... and they are living with the aftermath

[Robertbarlage]

Just like health care ... $10000 toilet seat ect..ect

[oneoff]

Coal fired production is presently a completely dead issue in Ontario. Its lierally been buried and forgotten. Apparently not even worthly of historical mention. Unit trains were literally sent daily from the Estevan area though the Souris sub railway connection to Ontario on a daily basis. A few years later a slightly more northerly line got the rail movement contract. Now there are no more coal trains. So the article misses coals non contribution to Ontario Hydro; and we are not talking ancient history here.


Secondly;; as I understand it; some forms of energy get preferred access to the electrical grids at all times; whether needed or not; whether they could ever be construed as providing base load; and certainly whether or not they could ever be counted on to contribute to solving a peak load demand. That shouldn't make them automatically the darlings; I say look at the work horses and not just the sleek in fashion new models and topics of the day.

Solar and wind are intermittent suppliers; but with a continuous connection to the grid; no way to be disconnected from the grid whether they are needed (or not)or whether they are a high cost source at that particular moment....for the simple fact that there is no remote way (widely available at present and granted that can and will and must be changed if they become more than a significant producer in total)at present to control any output from these hundreds or thousand of relatively minor amounts each. That state can and does present challenges and problems. See the German experience for what is in store for us when and if we reach their present dependence.


Thirdly its looking like a fact that power utilities rate their generation at the nameplate specifications. When those units can be counted on for say 85 plus percent (day and night) to deliver that capacity then you have a yearly expectation of what they can deliver and its within a range of common sense expectation of electrical generation


I'm sore afraid that solar is closer to 15% in Western Canada and not much more anywhere else in the world. So when engineers and the press and owners of those units say 10Mw they are going to be grossly disappointed when they awill see more than 1.5 Mw capacity throughout a day (or month or the equipment's lifetime)


So 30 sites; each with 10 Mw solar PV capacity are closer to not being in an order of magnitude of the actual generating ability of one coal burning 300Mw capacity boiler.


Not a nit picking detail; but a cold hard fact that could only be solved by connecting to a cold fusion device and a perpetual motion machine.

So just because a reporter puts some facts together in an article doesn't mean there is a whole lot more to the story.

There may be more that could be commented on; but it would probably just be a repeat of what has been said before.

Balance and facts and let the truth be what decisions are made on.

[oneoff]

This difference is what accounts for the gap between installed capacity and actual production. For example, nuclear power (which is part of the baseload) accounts for just 36 per cent of the province’s installed capacity (i.e., the province’s total generating power) but actually produces 60 per cent of the supply. Natural gas, which is mostly used for peaking, accounts for 28 per cent of installed capacity but produces just 10 per cent of the supply.

A very good way determining who the work horse are

From the second installment of the globe and mail article above

The second-largest source is hydroelectricity, which accounted for 24 per cent of generation in 2015, followed by natural-gas plants (10 per cent) and wind power (6 per cent). Biofuel (which essentially means burning wood pellets) and solar power each provided less than 1 per cent of the province’s power supply.

What this says is 60% Nuclear...24% hydro....10% natural gas....6% wind ...and a fraction of a percent each for biofuel and solar. Adds up to about 100% like it should

For installed capacity 36% nuclear...28% natural gas ...hydro and wind not accounted for; biofuel can be considered insignificant and solar would be about 6% if it generated close to 1% of the usage (thats my only calculation inserted.

The question remains if Ontario is a net generator of electricity for export; but if they have a cost control problem that won't be likely..now or in the future.

Guess we need to read the whole article...and probably more to get the rest of the installed capacity figures for Ontario.

It is interesting that the article does say "peaked power is only switched on when needed". I'd be very surprised if one drop of electricity from solar is controlled by the utility going into the grid.

[Hamloc]

Ok 1% solar and 6% wind in Ontario. Realistic use in Germany not much different. Yet in Alberta they believe we can supply 30% with renewables and in Saskatchewan 50%. What percentage of this is hydro power? It appears in real world situations wind and solar are a very small percentage! We are being fed a lot of bullshit!