Documents filed under Energy Policy from Canada
Alberta’s electricity grid is characterized as deregulated and thermally dependent with a growing number of wind power facilities. Using a model to simulate both the unit commitment and economic dispatch decisions of the system operator, the total net CO2 reductions that result from the addition of wind energy into a heavily fossil-fuel based grid are estimated, assuming that contingency reserves are provided by part-loaded natural-gas fired units. Increasing wind generation levels lead to increased CO2 levels from reserve energy production but total CO2 levels decline slightly.
In the Ontario electricity generation sector, this paper shows that selection of an intermittent carbon free wind generator actually increases the carbon emissions by displacing other carbon free generators, nuclear and hydraulic, and requiring the operation of carbon emitting natural gas and even coal generators to provide support for when the intermittent wind generation routinely falls in output. The introduction and conclusion of this paper are shown below. The full paper can be accessed by clicking on the link(s) at the bottom of this page.
Dr. Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics at the University of Guelph specializing in energy and environmental policy, submitted these comments regarding the K2 Wind Power Project to the Ontario Energy Board. A summary of his comments are excerpted below. His full letter can be accessed by selecting the links at the bottom of this page.
An Open Letter has been sent to the Prime Minister of Canada and the Minister of Health for Canada exposing numerous insufficient procedures and processes utilized in order for Health Canada to develop a national study into the known and acknowledged adverse health effects from industrial wind installations. The Health Canada study design as published on July 10, 2012 is expected to be concluded in 2014. Concerns are that the design is not crafted thoroughly enough and that the participants are not independent experts. This could produce unscientific results which will have global consequences. Carmen Krogh is one of the world's foremost independent researchers on health impacts of wind turbines and author of the attached letter.
In the fall of 2009 Dr. Arlene King, Chief Medical Officer of Health for Ontario (CMOH), took on the task of investigating the issue of industrial wind turbines and potential adverse health effects. On May 20, 2010, the Chief Medical Officer of Health of Ontario (CMOH) issued “The Potential Health Impacts of Wind Turbines May 2010” (CMOH Review). In response, an analysis was conducted by The Society for Wind Vigilance of the CMOH Review. The executive summary of the report is provided below. The full report prepared by Society for Wind Vigilance can be accessed via the links below.
Ontario needs to return to rational decision-making when it comes to ensuring that current strategies meet future power generation needs. Current policies, such as the promotion of wind power, reflect public concerns about global warming at the expense of securing a stable and economic energy future. If such publicly popular but economically unsound policies continue, the province’s prosperity will be seriously jeopardized. In this provocative paper, one of the world’s leading experts on electricity generation traces the history of electrical utilities in Ontario and why their continued existence is essential to providing power cheaply and efficiently. In fact, he urges continued promotion of utilities as the best way to ensure that Ontario’s carbon footprint is reduced while maintaining its economic well-being.
Resolution # 8, duly Moved and Seconded, from the December 1, 2008 meeting of the Council of the Township of Dawn-Euphemia
North American Electric Reliability Corporation released this assessment of the reliability and adequacy of the bulk power system in North America for the next ten years.
On Jun 12, MA DOER granted Hydro Quebec approval for 108MW of wind to be eligible for the MA Rec market. There is an additional 212MW of wind that is already operating and may soon follow. DOER's decision is attached. A number of folks familiar with the New England REC market believe this decision, to be followed by others, will seriously depress REC values.
Rube Goldberg would admire the utter purity of the pretensions of wind technology in pursuit of a safer modern world, claiming to be saving the environment while wreaking havoc upon it. But even he might be astonished by the spin of wind industry spokesmen. Consider the comments made by the American Wind Industry Association.s Christina Real de Azua in the wake of the virtual nonperformance of California.s more than 13,000 wind turbines in mitigating the electricity crisis precipitated by last July.s .heat storm.. .You really don.t count on wind energy as capacity,. she said. .It is different from other technologies because it can.t be dispatched.. (84) The press reported her comments solemnly without question, without even a risible chortle. Because they perceive time to be running out on fossil fuels, and the lure of non-polluting wind power is so seductive, otherwise sensible people are promoting it at any cost, without investigating potential negative consequences-- and with no apparent knowledge of even recent environmental history or grid operations. Eventually, the pedal of wishful thinking and political demagoguery will meet the renitent metal of reality in the form of the Second Law of Thermodynamics (85) and public resistance, as it has in Denmark and Germany. Ironically, support for industrial wind energy because of a desire for reductions in fossil-fueled power and their polluting emissions leads ineluctably to nuclear power, particularly under pressure of relentlessly increasing demand for reliable electricity. Environmentalists who demand dependable power generation at minimum environmental risk should take care about what they wish for, more aware that, with Rube Goldberg machines, the desired outcome is unlikely to be achieved. Subsidies given to industrial wind technology divert resources that could otherwise support effective measures, while uninformed rhetoric on its behalf distracts from the discourse.and political action-- necessary for achieving more enlightened policy.
The purpose of this study is to review the performance of wind power in Ontario, with particular attention to the period since the beginning of wind farm operations greater than 20 MW in the spring of 2006. This study comments on the GE Wind Power Integration Study released October 24, 2006 and hereafter referred to as the GE Study. Energy Probe’s study also provides recommendations arising from the observations of the performance results.
International Experience With Implementing Wind Energy examines the relative costs, advantages and disadvantages of wind generation. In addition, the report explores infrastructure issues, public attitudes toward wind development, and the various policy instruments used to support the development of wind energy in countries that are leaders in implementing wind energy.
This working paper is made available by the Resource and Environmental economics and Policy Analysis (REPA) Research Group at the University of Victoria. REPA working papers have not been peer reviewed and contain preliminary research findings. They shall not be cited without the expressed written consent of the author(s). Editor's Note: The authors’ conclusion regarding ‘effective capacity’, i.e. the measure of a generator’s contribution to system reliability that is tied to meeting peak loads, is that it “is difficult to generalize, as it is a highly site-specific quantity determined by the correlation between wind resource and load” and that ‘values range from 26 % to 0% of rated capacity.” This conclusion is based, in part, on a 2003 study by the California Energy Commission that estimated that three wind farm aggregates- Altamont, San Gorgonio and Tehachpi, which collectively represent 75% of California’s deployed wind capacity- had relative capacity credits of 26.0%, 23.9% and 22.0% respectively. It is noteworthy that during California’s Summer ’06 energy crunch, as has been widely publicized in the press, wind power produced at 254.6 MW (10.2% of wind’s rated capacity of 2,500MW) at the time of peak demand (on July 24th) and over the preceding seven days (July 17-23) produced at 89.4 to 113.0 MW, averaging only 99.1 MW at the time of peak demand or just 4% of rated capacity.
The development of commercial wind power that is currently fashionable is potentially misguided, ineffective and neither environmentally nor socially benign; but it is the right of citizens of rural areas to enjoy both clean and safe energy generation and an unspoiled countryside.