| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:55 pm Post subject: CBC: Ontario drops plans for 2 new nuclear reactors |
 |
|
| Quote: | "We still believe that in our energy supply mix to have new nuclear units to replace some of our aging fleet is very prudent for Ontario. But we will not purchase any such units at any cost. The cost must be right for the people of Ontario," said Energy Minister George Smitherman on Monday morning.
The province's Liberal government said three years ago it would spend about $26.5 billion to build the new nuclear reactors. |
Source: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toron.....clear.html
Just to make sure I am clear on this situation,
Ontario's government is now opposed to Coal AND Nuclear power? |
|
|
|
 |
ezbeatz
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 1140
  
votes: 10
Location: Vaughan, ON
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cosmo, the Liberal's are afraid that if they commit to buying AECL they will be saddled with a one of a kind boondoggle (since nobody else seems to be interested in AECL). AECL has a history in Ontario of going billions of dollars over budget. I think it was Darlington reactor that was suppose to cost $6 billion and ended up costing $14 billion.
Put AECL into the ground or sell it off. They're an embarrassment.
On the up side, AECL reactors are really good at making nuclear bombs. Just ask the Indians and Pakistanis. |
|
|
|
|
kwlafayette
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That appears to be the stance of a majority of people actually. They want renewables; which really means that power will not be cheap, reliable, nor widely available within the foreseeable future. Infant mortality rates will rise, which brings us back to the real goal; overpopulated world means people have to die. |
|
|
|
|
Mac
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How do they plan to make electricity? Plant millions of "current bushes" and plug 'em in?
-Mac |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mac wrote: | How do they plan to make electricity? Plant millions of "current bushes" and plug 'em in?
-Mac |
Right now, because of the economy, Ontario has a large surplus of the type of power reactors produce (steady power 24/7). At the moment they are actually paying people to take the power in some cases (to keep the grid healthy) http://www.thepeterboroughexam.....?e=1587344
If they could build a reactor tommorrow, we would have to pay people to take the power at times.
Those reactors were designed to meet INCREASING demand when infact its falling right now. I guess it all depends on your crystal ball, but if they can put the reactors off a few years, they will save a tonne on interest. At the same time, they will get a better reactor because AECL will have its newer model ready (or it will be gone and the province and look elsewhere). |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fiscalconservative wrote: | | Mac wrote: | How do they plan to make electricity? Plant millions of "current bushes" and plug 'em in?
-Mac |
Right now, because of the economy, Ontario has a large surplus of the type of power reactors produce (steady power 24/7). At the moment they are actually paying people to take the power in some cases (to keep the grid healthy) http://www.thepeterboroughexam.....?e=1587344
If they could build a reactor tommorrow, we would have to pay people to take the power at times.
Those reactors were designed to meet INCREASING demand when infact its falling right now. I guess it all depends on your crystal ball, but if they can put the reactors off a few years, they will save a tonne on interest. At the same time, they will get a better reactor because AECL will have its newer model ready (or it will be gone and the province and look elsewhere). |
Just a ballpark question,
How long does it take to build a reactor? and how long do we see a reduced amount of power consumption in Ontario? |
|
|
|
|
ezbeatz
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 1140
votes: 10
Location: Vaughan, ON
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cosmostein wrote: | Just a ballpark question,
How long does it take to build a reactor? and how long do we see a reduced amount of power consumption in Ontario? |
Depends on how efficient the building process is. AECL is notorious for delays and cost overruns. Some of the parts for nuclear reactors are only manufactured by one company so you can get bottle necks that take years to clear out. But usually, if everything goes well, the reactors should be up and operational within a decade. |
|
|
|
|
kwlafayette
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cosmostein wrote: |
Just a ballpark question,
How long does it take to build a reactor? and how long do we see a reduced amount of power consumption in Ontario? |
What!?!? Taking a long view!?!?! Why, you absolute ans total neophyte, how dare you question someone who has conservative right there in their handle! |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ezbeatz wrote: | | cosmostein wrote: | Just a ballpark question,
How long does it take to build a reactor? and how long do we see a reduced amount of power consumption in Ontario? |
Depends on how efficient the building process is. AECL is notorious for delays and cost overruns. Some of the parts for nuclear reactors are only manufactured by one company so you can get bottle necks that take years to clear out. But usually, if everything goes well, the reactors should be up and operational within a decade. |
Cost overruns on infrastructure projects are moot to me.
Whatever the overruns may be will certainly be election fodder in the near term, but as long as we have an upgraded whoziwazit that we will benefit from for decades the ends justify the means IMVHO.
But far to often we have government that will let us suffer long term so they can look good short term.
So lets even call it 15 years for the sake of argument, if power consumption levels continued to increase at even half the numbers they did from say 2006 - 2007, will we need additional reactors or power sources by 2024? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kwlafayette wrote: | | cosmostein wrote: |
Just a ballpark question,
How long does it take to build a reactor? and how long do we see a reduced amount of power consumption in Ontario? |
What!?!? Taking a long view!?!?! Why, you absolute ans total neophyte, how dare you question someone who has conservative right there in their handle! |
I know,
the whole long term view thing is a problem that will always keep me out of politics LOL |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mac wrote: | How do they plan to make electricity? Plant millions of "current bushes" and plug 'em in?
-Mac |
In Simcoe North we get a field of solar panels on prime agricultural land at a liberally subsidized cost of 50 cents per kilowatt ... who needs food anyways when you can have subsidized a/c :roll:
I haven't seen the movie yet but can electricity be made from Soylent Green ??? |
|
|
|
|
kwlafayette
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It does bother me when people site current demand/conditions, saying there is enough now, and then implicitly extrapolate that into "therefore there will always be enough/we will never need more". If manufacturing actually recovered in Ontario, you could be into rolling blackouts in just a few years. Or conversely, you can have all the electricity you want during daylight hours/when the wind is blowing, but only when it is warmer than -30. |
|
|
|
|
|
