100% Self-Sustaining Renewable Energy Project in PEI

[Karlin]

By 2015 PEI will be selling excess electricity that is produced from renewable sources like wind.

That is stunning, since it is "viable", it will be profitable, and most importantly it is possible all across Canada.
....and it is reducing emissions of global warming greehouse gasses at the same time.

The CBC program on it is calling it "PEI's energy gamble" instead of an energy miracle [in that they said it could not be done yet here it is].
Media and big oil sure have a close relationship eh?

http://www.gov.pe.ca/news/getrelease.php3?number=3622


-----------------------------------------------

The province of Prince Edward Island (PEI) plans to introduce renewable tariffs later this year, the first jurisdiction to do so in North America. The tariffs will be used to develop community-owned wind generation on the island.

"This is the most far-reaching proposal of its kind in North America,"

So we CAN get our little bits of money together, and build windmills that will produce free electricity for about 50 years after just 5 years to pay for itself.

This is great for the whole community, it helps secure energy supply in uncertain times, cuts pollution, and provides profits.

Now THATS where government comes in handy. If only we had more governments who would be willing to do "the right thing" for a change. Governments are as close to big oil as the media is eh?

So whadda ya think? Renewable energy projects as a sort of socialist experiment? {note - we have been doing good projects for 100 years on that basis, and in fact thats how most rural and remote electricity grids got started in Canada. Its not new or novel or untested, it just does not suit big oil or conservative thinkers to do such these sustainable energy projects.


http://www.ontario-sea.org/PressReleases/OSEAPR040610.html


------------

Herb Dhaliwal, PC, MP speach:
http://www.canren.gc.ca/programs/index.asp?CaId=107&PgId=628

There is no one solution to climate change. People have to think globally and act locally. And it requires action from everyone. It requires action from provincial and territorial governments. It requires action from electricity producers and from consumers.

Purchasing our power from renewable sources is just one way that we can all help.

The Wind Power Production Incentive (WPPI) was announced in the 2001 budget by my colleague, the Minister of Finance, Paul Martin. It is a $260-million program that will increase the amount of wind power available in Canada by 500 percent.

Canadian Wind Energy Association plans to install 10,000 megawatts by 2010.

K - this is a significant dent in our total energy needs.

Just imagine being totaly energy self-sufficient, apart from the global crisis in prices for crude oil, free of the shaft America gives us, and able to direct our spending as we see fit and not spending on crude oil projects and high gas prices.

It is silly-stupid to go ahead with any more fossil fuels projects, and it is nearly criminal to continue government gifts to the oil industry in the form of corporate welfare - royalty cuts, free loans, lack of regulation enforcement, etc. No, spending it on windmills will provide a much better return for taxpayer money - in 10 years time that will be so very obvious...

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

I think the secret, because the various levels of government keep crying poverty, is to remove all subsidies from oil and gas, and pour that money into renewable resources.

Even things like recycling ultimately save energy, and it all saves us money. The myth that we should keep paying to keep the polluters afloat because it's "good for the economy" is a huge lie because we don't add the cost of environmental damage, including health costs, into the equation.

 

[Senathos]

RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

Reverend Blair, could you please provide a link which says that Canadian Oil and Gas companies get subsidies? I find it hard to believe, especially in Alberta, that there would be subsidies given to companies like Petro-Canada.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

Read It's the Crude Dude and an article that was in The Walrus about a year ago. You'll find that they get subsidies, tax breaks, and all kinds of graft and kickbacks. The Alberta government negotiated what is likely the worst deal on the planet...basically no cost or risk for the oil companies.

Here is the biggest subsidy of all though. Oil companies are not made to pay for the environmental and health problems they cause. They incur costs on the rest of society, but are never made to pay those costs. That amounts to billions a year.

 

[Senathos]

RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

Unfortunately, I looked up "The Walrus", and all I found was an independent media outlet, which is just as credible as the al-Qaida website. These "indie" news sites are all terrible, offering every (false) opinion from Saddam nuked the US to Bush having eaten a baby.

In regards to your second point, you seem to believe that an externality caused by the industry is a subsidy. One could say that about any industry, so there is no credible argument there. The Oil and Gas industry gets no money from governments in subsidies.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

The Walrus is a reputable print magazine. It's Canadian too...you should buy a subscription to halp out the Canadian magazine industry. The sources in the article are all cited and footnoted. Same with It's the Crude, Dude.

The subsidies may not be direct, but huge tax breaks and sweetheart deals are still a subsidy...ask any trade organisation.

As for your second point, my point still stands. I don't care if it's a corporation dumping poison in a river or air pollution caused by fossil fuels, not making corporations pay the cost of the pollution they cause is a de facto subsidy.

 

[MMMike]

Re: RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

I think the secret, because the various levels of government keep crying poverty, is to remove all subsidies from oil and gas, and pour that money into renewable resources.

Even things like recycling ultimately save energy, and it all saves us money. The myth that we should keep paying to keep the polluters afloat because it's "good for the economy" is a huge lie because we don't add the cost of environmental damage, including health costs, into the equation.

Agree... its kind of like the broken windows argument, that when you break a window its good for the economy because they all need to be fixed.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

If you get a chance, MMMike, see Robert Kennedy Jr. speak on this subject. I've seen him on TV a couple of times and he's got all the facts and figures. The money that we've wasted supporting polluters is insane.

RFK Jr. is also a hell of a speaker...a lot of those things are boring as hell, but he keeps things entertaining.

 

[progressive]

i think that solar, wind, and fuel cells are the future......one of the biggest problems with the implementation of renewable energy is the connection that government has with oil companies......i purpose that private donations to political parties be outlawed, that would certainly elleviate some of the problem. also, these energy companies should be crown owned, not private, that way we can all get a fair and just rate for our energy, i suppose though the united states would highly discourage this though. how dare we prevent them from raping us of our resources and polluting our environment. good post, i just wish the bc liberals had the initiative to take on a project like that, but they are blood sucking parisites, so that'll never happen.

 

[coldstream]

Windmills are both unsightly and noisey as well as being inefficient. Solar power is expensive in terms of initial expense. Solar panels have to be replaced regulary, and graphite is strip mined for their production. Battery cells, like those being developed for automobiles involve major problem in disposing of their toxic contents. The least expensive, most efficient way of producing power is still fossil fuels. The cheapest and most available fossil fuel is coal, which has all but gone out of production in terms of new generating facilities. Clean burning technology now has substantially reduced the pollution of these projects.

Despite their political correctness, these faddish energy sources of solar and wind are at best local and limited in their application. You can build a windmill over your house if you can stand the noise and the look and your neigbours don't mind.. but after all the costs are in you'll find you won't have saved any money. Windmill farms have a major UGH factor when put into scenic locals like PEI or the foothills of the Rockies. The same goes for solar power. Nuclear and fossil fuels are the future. Canada has not invested in it Candu technology, once the best in the world, in years.. while they go around chasing these politically expedient but rather useless alternative energy solutions.

 

[PoisonPete2]

Windmills are both unsightly and noisey as well as being inefficient.

Answer - do some research. Windmills are coming in at around 65% efficiency now. With the focus of engineering that will rise and noise will be reduced. Oil burns at about 85% efficiency in a brand new high-efficiency furnace ($3500). But it doesn't get to that furnace without the expenditure of massive amounts of energy.

Solar power is expensive in terms of initial expense. Solar panels have to be replaced regulary, and graphite is strip mined for their production.

Answer - My first VCR (1975) cost me $900. Now you can pick working models out of garbage dumps. Wide use of panels will bring the per/watt price way down. The first solar panels are still working and at 90% of their original efficiency. NO REPLACEMENT REQUIRED. Oil doesn't have to be 'mined' in a fashion?

Battery cells, like those being developed for automobiles involve major problem in disposing of their toxic contents. The least expensive, most efficient way of producing power is still fossil fuels. The cheapest and most available fossil fuel is coal, which has all but gone out of production in terms of new generating facilities. Clean burning technology now has substantially reduced the pollution of these projects.

Answer - You are correct, battery cells are "being DEVELOPED". Not there yet, but they will be. Actually hydro power is much cheaper than fossil fuels. In the last paragraph you seemed to indicate some concern for the invironment re. strip-mining graphite for solar panels. Now, how the hell do you think they get coal out of the ground? At least the graphite would be used in a panel and not burned. Almost half of the oil production in Texas is from stripper wells that need water or natural gas to create back-pressure. But you want to dump mega-dollars into coal-burning facilities. Huge costs in mining and transportation. Is that efficient?

Despite their political correctness, these faddish energy sources of solar and wind are at best local and limited in their application. You can build a windmill over your house if you can stand the noise and the look and your neigbours don't mind.. but after all the costs are in you'll find you won't have saved any money. Windmill farms have a major UGH factor when put into scenic locals like PEI or the foothills of the Rockies. The same goes for solar power. Nuclear and fossil fuels are the future. Canada has not invested in it Candu technology, once the best in the world, in years.. while they go around chasing these politically expedient but rather useless alternative energy solutions.

Answer - windpower has been in use for many hundreds of years. In the last century solar, wind, and advanced fuel technologies have been suppressed by the oil companies. Start thinking globally. Have you been anywhere near a modern windmill? Not the old farmers grist mill is it? Quiet and efficient. Five years to pay for and 50 years of low maintanance minimal cost use. Doesn't take that many acres for a windmill farm to provide a lot of power. As glass is replaced in office towers it could be done with solar collectors. Less energy consumption for air-conditioning, heating and cooling. Every office roof could have solar collectors. We could walk around in clothing made of solar collectors and dump the energy into storage when we come home. Now yer nuclear fuel don't come from air buddy. It's enriched URANIUM. Thought you didn't like mines? Now uranium has this side effect RADATION that the scientists don't know how to deal with. Causes cancer. Gee it causes DEATH. Bio-mass would be far more efficient than fossil fuels if the government would get its act together. Something that is RENEWABLE is better than something that can get exhausted. Coal plants are not pretty, nuclear plants may be pretty (dangerous). Have you lived close to a sour gas well? Not a pretty smell.

Now you are either completely unread on this subject or you are with one of the sunset industries (oil, coal, nukes), or maybe just a fan of waste, pollution and private enterprise controlling power.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

It sounds to me like Coldstream has a vested interest in dirty fuels. Clean technologies are available right now and are being developed all of the time. They are clean and, when health and environmental costs are taken into consideration, already cheaper than fossil fuels.

Fossil fuels are only cheap if we don't take into account all of the associated costs. Those costs are still there though, and we end up paying for them with our taxes, our insurance money, and the destruction of our environment.

 

[MMMike]

Re: RE: 100% Self-Sustaining Renewable Energy Project in PEI

i think that solar, wind, and fuel cells are the future......one of the biggest problems with the implementation of renewable energy is the connection that government has with oil companies......i purpose that private donations to political parties be outlawed, that would certainly elleviate some of the problem. also, these energy companies should be crown owned, not private, that way we can all get a fair and just rate for our energy, i suppose though the united states would highly discourage this though. how dare we prevent them from raping us of our resources and polluting our environment. good post, i just wish the bc liberals had the initiative to take on a project like that, but they are blood sucking parisites, so that'll never happen.

Re campaign donations:

In June 2003, Parliament passed Bill C-24 which made historic changes Canada's 29-year-old political fundraising law. Among other progressive changes, starting January 1, 2004:

there is a $5,000 combined total annual limit on donations by each Canadian to each political party and the parties' election candidates;
corporations, unions and other organizations are prohibited from donating to parties, and are only allowed to give an annual combined total of $1,000 to all candidates

Not perfect, and there are still loopholes around but imo this is maybe the only good thing Chretien has ever done for the country.

 

[MMMike]

Windmills are both unsightly and noisey as well as being inefficient. Solar power is expensive in terms of initial expense. Solar panels have to be replaced regulary, and graphite is strip mined for their production. Battery cells, like those being developed for automobiles involve major problem in disposing of their toxic contents. The least expensive, most efficient way of producing power is still fossil fuels. The cheapest and most available fossil fuel is coal, which has all but gone out of production in terms of new generating facilities. Clean burning technology now has substantially reduced the pollution of these projects.

Despite their political correctness, these faddish energy sources of solar and wind are at best local and limited in their application. You can build a windmill over your house if you can stand the noise and the look and your neigbours don't mind.. but after all the costs are in you'll find you won't have saved any money. Windmill farms have a major UGH factor when put into scenic locals like PEI or the foothills of the Rockies. The same goes for solar power. Nuclear and fossil fuels are the future. Canada has not invested in it Candu technology, once the best in the world, in years.. while they go around chasing these politically expedient but rather useless alternative energy solutions.

Every energy source has to stand on its own with respect to economic viability. Right now, though, the massive amount of pollution and environmental devastation and health impact of fossil fuels is not reflected in the cost. This needs to change.

In terms of battery cells - this was always a BIG drawback for solar, and other decentralized means of production but the use of smart, two-way meters will make batteries redundant. The grid is the battery - any excess power will be sold back to the utility.

 

[PoisonPete2]

two-way meters will make batteries redundant. The grid is the battery - any excess power will be sold back to the utility.

Answer - that IS the solution. I'm still looking for enough truck batteries, but your way I could contribute directly to the grid and get the benefit of sharing the power.

 

[mrmom2]

There doing it in Alberta already . :wink:

 

[Reverend Blair]

Answer - that IS the solution. I'm still looking for enough truck batteries, but your way I could contribute directly to the grid and get the benefit of sharing the power.

Check with your electric company, Pete. If they won't allow you to install a two-way meter and sell back into the grid, then go to your politicans and ask them to deal with it. The technology is available right now.

 

[coldstream]

It sounds to me like Coldstream has a vested interest in dirty fuels. Clean technologies are available right now and are being developed all of the time..

In fact Reverend, I have no stock holding whatsoever in the energy sector and I believe fervently that all major electricity producers should be publically owned. I do have an interest though in not seeing my electricity bill going through the roof, and to ensure that we have to ensure adequate supply, and regulation.

As for the windmills being around for hundreds of years, if you go to Holland you'll usually see they are built far from houses and villages because they are so noisy. They can be quaint and picturesque but modern windmill farms are anything but.

I'm not against the research, these sources have some uses, but we will always need major THERMAL generating capacity as long as we remain an industrial society (which might be coming under threat now thanks to free trade and radical environmentalism)

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

A windmill or two serving a small community isn't too noisy though, Coldstream. It keeps prices down, too. Windmill farms are noisy because there are so many windmills. The same goes for any kind of farm...one cow is relatively quiet, but get 100 of them together and it gets noisy.

There are also many other alternatives, from tidal to solar. There are micro hydro generators that can be built along rivers. There are larger hydro projects. There are literally hundreds of choices and the cost of those choices drops as more and more of them put into production.

 

[Karlin]

Re: RE: 100% Self-Sustaining

Reverend Blair, could you please provide a link which says that Canadian Oil and Gas companies get subsidies? I find it hard to believe, especially in Alberta, that there would be subsidies given to companies like Petro-Canada.

This, the third post in the thread, is negative towards the proposed idea. No substance, no arguement, just a distraction about "oh, the oil and gas people don't get subsidies".
Sure they do, thanks Rev. But the doubt was sown, the argument derailed. Distraction is an effective tactic that serves the Elites in their manipulation of the facts.

But this begs the larger question - are these naysayers really THAT brainwashed into believing the whole system is NOT tilted favorably and unfairly towards oil and gas?
How do we get them to see the truth - will it take a hurricane season like this, or will it have to be told to him by King Ralph himself for these people to believe it? That will never happen - he has so much to lose in his favoured position.

The sad part is that all us "aware" people have to go down with the ship. And the natural systems of the planet earth have to go down too. And any morality we have developed as a species will be lost if this carries to its ultimate conclusion. Get off the ship of fools.