Cold Air from Wordpress

I saw this tweet from Cherise Burda - the Ontario director of the Pembina Institute https://twitter.com/CheriseBurda/status/494572494192672768 It's one of those statements that looks intelligent if it comes from somebody who is presentable as being intelligent. It isn't. The "Provincial Gas Tax" is shown as 14.3 cents per litre in both pies, and there is no indication in the tweet, pies, or reality, that the carbon content of a litre of gasoline has changed. Burda's description of that as a "REVERSE CARBON TAX" is dumber than her understanding of when a capital letter is appropriate. This is why I am hesitant on a carbon taxation; the most vocal proponents don't speak intelligently on the topic, and they aren't looking for a tool that will allow markets to find carbon mitigation measures - they are usually looking for a revenue tool to carry on their pet idiocy.   Related: I don't see any substantial changes since I wrote A tool to heal, a ...

This is an excellent opportunity to learn about an environment Toronto's government intends to neglect.

I posted this to coldairings.luftonline.net yesterday - which is hid (to me) by gremlins this morning - so I am repeating the post here. A couple of weeks ago I wrote on why the IESO's reporting of "Ontario demand" isn't reflective of actual demand in Ontario. Embedded generation is lowering the demands on generators feeding directly into the IESO's grid - and because much of it is solar, the IESO is reporting lower demand during sunnier hours. Omitting embedded solar generation has changed the demand profile indicated by the IESO's reporting. Today is a good example of what's happening and how it can impact the hours chosen to determine global adjustment shares for Class A customers, which are implemented to allocate significant charges for an entire 12-month billing period. The IESO forecast a peak demand at hour 17 (5-6pm), at 20,295MW The IESO now reports peak demand at hour 19 (7-8pm) at 20,388MW I've pulled the estimated embedded generation ...

I posted this to coldair.luftonline.net yesterday - which has some gremlins this morning, so I'm double posting here When the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) released data projections made in supporting the development of Ontario's latest Long Term Energy Plan  (LTEP) they showed the cost of purchasing generation from solar would grow about $280 million in 2014 (in 2012 dollars), and $443 million in 2015. The OPA anticipated that 45% of the growth in in generation costs from 2013 through 2015 would be due to the costs of purchasing production from solar panels. 45% 45% of the cost increase over a 2 year period puts solar, in 2015, as about 1% of supply but 10% of total supply cost (according to the OPA work for the LTEP). I've spent some time trying to incorporate hourly estimates of solar input into my tracking of Ontario electricity data. It's not easy, and it's dynamic, so I'm writing this post to explain how I'm estimating solar production, why my estimat...

I saw that A lberta was setting demand records the past couple of days, so I visited the Alberta Electricity System Operator (AESO) website to see how wind generation contributed to meeting peak demand. Not surprisingly, it didn't [caption id="attachment_217" align="alignright" width="468"] AESO Daily Market Report, July 15, 2014 from ets.aeso.ca [/caption] I say not surprisingly because I've  written on this before, in July 2012 . Alberta has some comparatively strong wind resources, and seeing that it gets most electricity from coal, I can't feel too strongly about the increase in wind turbines there. However, the lull during this latest record does again demonstrate that industrial wind turbine output has little capacity value, can't displace firm generation, and is a low quality, low value, electricity generation source.  

American firster Bill BcKibben has written a staunch defence of coal billionaire Tom Steyer, aka sugar daddy, which includes, in the concluding paragraph (emphasis added). While the Times was busy trying to shame Steyer for the crime of changing his mind, real journalists at the Toronto Star were completing an investigation into the extent of the Koch holdings in the far north . Piecing together all the scattered data, they found that they control an astonishing 1.1 million acres of the tarsands , and that they are huge contributors to all the "thinktanks" and campaigns trying to build Keystone and other pipelines. And there's nothing even remotely hypocritical about it - - it's just disgusting. maybe that's not what's disgusting.

The Mowat Centre study may or may not have been terrible, but the timing of its release certainly was.