Electricity in Alberta today

[chuckChuck]

And Stephen Harper also signed a G7 agreement that Canada would stop using fossil fuels as an energy source by the year 2100.

We can still use them for other reasons.

Nobody is suggesting we stop using fossil fuels before we have reliable options.

So get over the idea you are going to freeze in the dark.

Denmark's example shows that large amounts of intermittent renewable can be integrated succesfully.

Yeah fossil fuels have seemed a lot cheaper on the surface. They are subsidized. The external costs of environmental damage, pollution, health costs and climate change are hidden or being paid for by taxpayers. So they are not that cheap.

Plus the cheaper they are the more consumers waste them. There is lots of room for improving efficiency and using less.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Denmark's example shows that large amounts of intermittent renewable can be integrated succesfully.

In one sentence, this statement has defined the fundamental reason why most of us disagree with the radical left.

They apparently define achieving the most expensive electricity prices in the world, and more than 4 times higher than our own, as being a success.
The only rational explanation of how one could consider that to be a success, is if the intended outcome is the destruction of industry, and impoverishing the citizenry to drive their standard of living down.

Edit, makes one wonder what they would define as a failure?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

If I remember Chuck I brought this topic up in February last year when it was much colder than average for the whole month.

March 7, 2019 in fact:

Chuck2 here is a very simple question. It is 12:28 pm here in Alberta. It is a sunny but cold day. I just looked at the AESO supply and demand report. There is a 15 MW solar farm at Brooks Alberta. Right now it is producing 0 MW. Why is that? You brag up solar, you talk about all these brilliant engineers and how a simple farmer like myself can't be right. Wouldn't today be a perfect day for winter production of solar energy? Where is our electricity going to come from on a day like today in the future when wind and solar are not producing? Reply With Quote

[AlbertaFarmer5]

As of 11:30 on a clear winter day( at least here), Brooks solar is at 0% ( likely rounded down to the nearest even MW) , and wind across the province is up to 3% of capacity. This on a cold day where we are critically close to peak power consumption.



17 of the 23 wind farms indicate zero production.

[chuckChuck]

"In one sentence, this statement has defined the fundamental reason why most of us disagree with the radical left."

Then you also must disagree with Sask Power in a province that is run by a Conservative government that is planning on building a lot of wind capacity?

Explain that as left wing radicalism.

That would also mean that you disagree with the mostly Republican State of North Dakota that gets 25% of its electricity from wind power?

Are these left wing radicals in ND and Saskatchewan? LOL

You probably think Peter Lougheed was a left wing radical! LOL

Wind and solar are not going to totally replace fossil fuels but that doesn't mean they can't be used in many places to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and reduce carbon emissions.

Since you don't believe in climate science or human caused climate change then there is no problem, so why do anything?

"North Dakota is a leading U.S. state in wind power generation. Data from 2017 indicates that the state generates 26.8% of its electricity from wind, enough to power over one million homes[1].

As of the end of 2017, 2996 megawatts (MW) of generation capacity had been installed for wind power in North Dakota.[1] Additional capacity had been limited by transmission line constraints until the completion of a transmission line from Fargo to central Minnesota in 2015.[2] Additional wind farms are once again planned for the state.[3]

Very favorable wind conditions in the state enable wind farms to achieve capacity factors in excess of 40 percent. The Thunder Spirit wind farm, completed in 2015, is expected to have a capacity factor greater than 45 percent.[4][5]"

[Hamloc]

"In one sentence, this statement has defined the fundamental reason why most of us disagree with the radical left."

Then you also must disagree with Sask Power in a province that is run by a Conservative government that is planning on building a lot of wind capacity? Explain that as left wing radicalism.

That would also mean that you disagree with the mostly Republican State of North Dakota that gets 25% of its electricity from wind power?

Are these left wing radicals in ND and Saskatchewan? LOL

Wind and solar are not going to replace fossil fuels but that doesn't mean they can't be used in many places to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and reduce carbon emissions.

Since you don't believe in climate science or human caused climate change then there is no problem, so why do anything?

"North Dakota is a leading U.S. state in wind power generation. Data from 2017 indicates that the state generates 26.8% of its electricity from wind, enough to power over one million homes[1].

As of the end of 2017, 2996 megawatts (MW) of generation capacity had been installed for wind power in North Dakota.[1] Additional capacity had been limited by transmission line constraints until the completion of a transmission line from Fargo to central Minnesota in 2015.[2] Additional wind farms are once again planned for the state.[3]

Very favorable wind conditions in the state enable wind farms to achieve capacity factors in excess of 40 percent. The Thunder Spirit wind farm, completed in 2015, is expected to have a capacity factor greater than 45 percent.[4][5]"

Yes I have relatives in North Dakota who talk about the relentless wind. All this doesn't change the fact that when we have a cold Arctic high in Alberta that the wind does not blow when we need the electricity most. Same thing with Denmark electricity generated there won't help us here. You are willfully blind Chuck.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

So, if the most expensive electricity in the world is considered a success, WHAT DO YOU DEFINE AS A FAILURE?

By this generous measure, when cost is no object, anything that generates energy regardless of cost could be a success.

Can someone find the sources where ND and Sask energy have the stated goal of producing the highest electricity costs in the world, as indicated in Chuck's post?

[chuckChuck]

Wind capacity factors are 40 -50% in ND and they get 27% of their net electricity from wind.

Are southern Alberta and Southern Saskatchewan not windy? LOL

You guys says it doesnt work at all! LOL

Well, ND, Saskpower and Denmark, Germany, the UK all have significant wind power and prove that it does.

ND and Saskatchewan are just as cold as Alberta.

[chuckChuck]

Rates in ND and Saskatchewan are pretty cheap. But I know you want to pick the highest price jurisdiction to make your point! LOL

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Rates in ND and Saskatchewan are pretty cheap. But I know you want to pick the highest price jurisdiction to make your point! LOL

No, you brought up Denmark and claimed it is a poster child for successfully integrating wind. I define success in a different way, than just accomplishing something at all costs.

[chuckChuck]

And your argument falls apart when we look at Saskatchewan and North Dakota!

You would rather talk about the failure of the radical left! Than have to deal with real life examples close to home! LOL

[TSIPP]

Saskatchewan electricity rates are almost the highest of all provinces in Canada, maybe chunks considers this pretty cheep but I’ll have to disagree.