A climate success story: How Alberta got off coal power

[oneoff]

It is a bit more than hypocritical that farmers who have received government subsidies and support programs paid for by taxpayers over their career back as far as the 1970s,1980s to present, are now the ones who are complaining about development and support for renewable electricity generation systems.

Care to add more to the list: selfish; hypocrite; destroyer of CWB: maybe grifter....................et al.

[Hamloc]

It is a bit more than hypocritical that farmers who have received government subsidies and support programs paid for by taxpayers over their career back as far as the 1970s,1980s to present, are now the ones who are complaining about development and support for renewable electricity generation systems.

Chuck2 I just looked at Saskpower’s net metering page. On this page it projects a $45000 cost of a 15 kw on farm solar installation and a payback period ranging between 19-30 years. You constantly talk up how cheap and cost effective solar power is, looks to me that Saskpower’s projections aren’t much better than breakeven seeing as how the reasonable life expectancy of a solar system is 25-30 years. Is SaskPower wrong? It would appear to me that SaskPower no longer considers subsidizing solar installations to be a sound investment!

[Hamloc]

It is a bit more than hypocritical that farmers who have received government subsidies and support programs paid for by taxpayers over their career back as far as the 1970s,1980s to present, are now the ones who are complaining about development and support for renewable electricity generation systems.

A good CBC article on the subject for you Chuck2:Sask. solar industry blasts Saskpower’s relaunched ‘net metering’ program.

[chuckChuck]

Hamloc. There is no doubt that Sask Power is now discouraging customers from installing solar systems under their new program. Sask Power was never that interested in customers producing their own power under the net metering programs. But interest in Solar grew rapidly and they hit their target. Sask Power is more interested in their own wind power systems.

I am not sure what the new program will look like in terms of paying off a system. You would need to get a recent quote from an installer. Remember any electricity that you displace is a savings of about 14 cents per kwh in Saskatchewan. The price for surplus electricity only matters if you produce a lot extra. Size the system correctly to match average usage.

Remember Sask Power invested in CCS at Boundary at great expense to reduce carbon emissions with a massive subsidy from taxpayers and higher electricity costs from the CCS system.

They also cross subsidize various customers by offering large industrial users lower rates than residential customers. They also offer farm and rural rates a little bit lower than residential customers. Without knowing the various costs to produce and deliver electricity across the whole Sask Power system its unclear what the real cost are and who is getting subsidized. I doubt Sask Power wants to discuss these issues in public.

Alberta has several solar programs to take a look at. In Alberta with their deregulated system and market based pricing system, it looks like utility scale solar and wind are very competitive and economic because the costs per kwh are lower and falling. Wind is especially attractive. There are 24 wind farms under the AESO.

[Hamloc]

Hamloc. There is no doubt that Sask Power is now discouraging customers from installing solar systems under their new program. Sask Power was never that interested in customers producing their own power under the net metering programs. But interest in Solar grew rapidly and they hit their target. Sask Power is more interested in their own wind power systems.

I am not sure what the new program will look like in terms of paying off a system. You would need to get a recent quote from an installer. Remember any electricity that you displace is a savings of about 14 cents per kwh in Saskatchewan. The price for surplus electricity only matters if you produce a lot extra. Size the system correctly to match average usage.

Remember Sask Power invested in CCS at Boundary at great expense to reduce carbon emissions with a massive subsidy from taxpayers and higher electricity costs from the CCS system.

They also cross subsidize various customers by offering large industrial users lower rates than residential customers. They also offer farm and rural rates a little bit lower than residential customers. Without knowing the various costs to produce and deliver electricity across the whole Sask Power system its unclear what the real cost are and who is getting subsidized. I doubt Sask Power wants to discuss these issues in public.

Alberta has several solar programs to take a look at. In Alberta with their deregulated system and market based pricing system, it looks like utility scale solar and wind are very competitive and economic because the costs per kwh are lower and falling. Wind is especially attractive. There are 24 wind farms under the AESO.

Chuck very simple, sale of excess production during the summer months helps pay for the system and make up for lack of production during Dec. and January. Simple fact is that without subsidization solar still doesn't pay in western Canada!

As for industrial level power installations of solar and wind the true cost should include what it costs to provide power 24 hrs a day not just when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Remember Sask Power invested in CCS at Boundary at great expense to reduce carbon emissions with a massive subsidy from taxpayers and higher electricity costs from the CCS system.

Funny how your graph above only shows the coal with CCS plant (boondoggle) when comparing prices. Why do you suppose that plant was cherry picked?

[Guest]

Funny how your graph above only shows the coal with CCS plant (boondoggle) when comparing prices. Why do you suppose that plant was cherry picked?

its laughable

[chuckChuck]

[ATTACH]7353[/ATTACH]

Take a look.

A5 the reason Boundary is included is to compare the high cost of CCS versus already low carbon sources like wind and solar. If you look at the chart you will also see that they also compare low cost and higher cost gas systems without CCS. When wind and solar are putting out, less fuel is being burned, so less emissions.

Solar and wind both are cheaper than gas. The AESO says they can integrate significant amounts of both. There will be some additional costs to have both backup systems and renewables. But every system requires alternate backup sources in case power plants go down. You will have to ask the AESO what the additional costs are because they are unique to every grid system.

Hamloc, several major companies have and are investing in large amounts of solar and wind. And now solar is competitive in Alberta without subsidies. Both are viewed as the least cost way to reduce carbon emissions. And they don't have to operate all the time to do that.

Ironically, it's Alberta's deregulated market based electrical system that is paving the way for a large amount of solar and wind energy in Alberta simply because of lower costs.

[chuckChuck]

Here is the comparison again.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

A good CBC article on the subject for you Chuck2:Sask. solar industry blasts Saskpower’s relaunched ‘net metering’ program.

Here is the article Hamloc is referring to
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/sask-solar-industry-blasts-saskpower-s-relaunched-net-metering-program-1.5321716 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/sask-solar-industry-blasts-saskpower-s-relaunched-net-metering-program-1.5321716
Chuck hadn't responded to this article which contradicts everything he tells us about solar, so I thought perhaps he hadn't been able to find it without a link, just helping him out.

WIth quotes such as:

"(Solar) just simply will not survive without that one-to-one credit. It makes absolutely no sense that we would move to basically a 50 per cent credit,"

Actually it makes no sense that they still get 50 percent credit, compared to installing storage, selling excess back to the grid at half price is still a screaming bargain and a bad deal for the rest of the users burdened with the cost.

SaskPower wants nothing to do with residential solar

See the next quote for the reason.

Duncan said the new program will still a 'negative impact' on SaskPower's bottom line but not as much as its predecessor. SaskPower had previously said it would cost the corporation $54 million by the middle of the decade.

"If you can afford solar panels you can essentially forego a large chunk of your SaskPower bill and yet embedded in that power bill is a large part of the cost to keep the grid, the transmission, the distribution systems all in place," Duncan said.

This is what we have been telling Chuck all along

At the end of the contract, these customers will become part of the new program

So how long is your your contract Chuck, and how will this affect the payback period?

Edit, I read through some of the comments. I think Bob Toso is our Chuck, or at least they are comparing notes. Same tired meaningless comebacks.

[Hamloc]

Here is the article Hamloc is referring to
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/sask-solar-industry-blasts-saskpower-s-relaunched-net-metering-program-1.5321716 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/sask-solar-industry-blasts-saskpower-s-relaunched-net-metering-program-1.5321716
Chuck hadn't responded to this article which contradicts everything he tells us about solar, so I thought perhaps he hadn't been able to find it without a link, just helping him out.

WIth quotes such as:
Actually it makes no sense that they still get 50 percent credit, compared to installing storage, selling excess back to the grid at half price is still a screaming bargain and a bad deal for the rest of the users burdened with the cost.

See the next quote for the reason.

This is what we have been telling Chuck all along

So how long is your your contract Chuck, and how will this affect the payback period?

Edit, I read through some of the comments. I think Bob Toso is our Chuck, or at least they are comparing notes. Same tired meaningless comebacks.

Absolutely correct Ab5. I do question why Chuck bothers, he is not the least bit interested in what we say or think only in lecturing us. But what is really interesting is that SaskPower as a crown corporation acknowledges the cost to the system of micro generators such as individual solar installations. I am sure power companies are ok with it when the government picks up the tab and it doesn’t take as big of a bite out of their bottom line. Biggest falsehood imo is that renewables are a technological advancement, still consider them a step backwards!

[chuckChuck]

Hamloc and A5 in summary: subsidies, incentives and support to the oil industry and agriculture good. Subsidies, incentives and support to solar and other renewable electricity systems bad. LOL

You better tell the AESO and all the other corporate investors in Alberta including Enbridge, that wind and solar don't work and are a bad investment! I am sure they will listen to you!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Hamloc and A5 in summary: subsidies, incentives and support to the oil industry and agriculture good. Subsidies, incentives and support to solar and other renewable electricity systems bad. LOL

You better tell the AESO and all the other corporate investors in Alberta including Enbridge, that wind and solar don't work and are a bad investment! I am sure they will listen to you!

Did you read the CBC article?
Any response that is on topic, and relevant to the article?

[chuckChuck]

Yep I read it. I responded to Hamloc earlier when he asked about the CBC article. Here is one of my main points.

Sask power cross subsidizes various customers by offering large industrial users lower rates than residential customers. They also offer farm and rural rates a little bit lower than residential customers. Without knowing the various costs to produce and deliver electricity across the whole Sask Power system, its unclear what the real cost are and who is getting subsidized. I doubt Sask Power wants to discuss these issues in public.

I wouldn't rely on Duncan or Saskpower to be honest about what the net metering programs like solar and flare gas are costing Sask power. They are probably not willing to admit that cross subsidization is a reality in the whole system.

Saskpower offers the same rate to large rural users or small rural users regardless of how much electricity they use even though large users pay significantly larger share of the costs of delivering electricity. A small Kwh user gets full service and is billed only for the amount of Kwh that they use plus a small basic service charge.

In Alberta generation costs are separated from delivery and infrastructure costs which are a bigger share of the bill. Sask Power could switch to this type of billing system but small users including those with their own net metering generation systems would see their Sask Power charges increase substantially. As it sits now farm customers only pay around $30 basic service charge plus the the kwh they use.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Yep I read it. I responded to Hamloc earlier when he asked about the CBC article. Here is one of my main points.

Sask power cross subsidizes various customers by offering large industrial users lower rates than residential customers. They also offer farm and rural rates a little bit lower than residential customers. Without knowing the various costs to produce and deliver electricity across the whole Sask Power system, its unclear what the real cost are and who is getting subsidized. I doubt Sask Power wants to discuss these issues in public.

I wouldn't rely on Duncan or Saskpower to be honest about what the net metering programs like solar and flare gas are costing Sask power. They are probably not willing to admit that cross subsidization is a reality in the whole system.

Saskpower offers the same rate to large rural users or small rural users regardless of how much electricity they use even though large users pay significantly larger share of the costs of delivering electricity. A small Kwh user gets full service and is billed only for the amount of Kwh that they use plus a small basic service charge.

In Alberta generation costs are separated from delivery and infrastructure costs which are a bigger share of the bill. Sask Power could switch to this type of billing system but small users including those with their own net metering generation systems would see their Sask Power charges increase substantially. As it sits now farm customers only pay around $30 basic service charge plus the the kwh they use.

You must be a speech writer for Trudeau. An entire page of text without any relevance to the article, without saying anything and without addressing the fact that t contradicts all of your claims.