Showing posts with label OWA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OWA. Show all posts

Friday, September 5, 2014

Stay Clear, Stay Safe - Dam Safety

Always an important message when it comes to hydroelectric power.

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) is urging the public to exercise extreme caution around waterways, and to be mindful of water safety especially near or around hydroelectric stations and dams.

"Stay clear, stay safe is a simple message," says Mike Martelli, OPG's Senior Vice President of Hydro-Thermal Operations. "Ontario's lakes and rivers are popular holiday weekend destinations but people need to keep themselves and their families safe by paying attention to the warnings signs, fences and booms around hydroelectric stations."
Most hydroelectric facilities are controlled remotely by operators located many kilometres away. As a result, dams can suddenly open at any time, creating rapid change to water levels and flows, while producing deadly undertows.
Additional water safety information can be found online at www.stayclearstaysafe.ca including links to OPG's water safety partners - the Ontario Provincial Police, and the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters.

SOURCE Ontario Power Generation Inc.

Quebec-Ontario electricity trade is smart, but not simple - The Globe and Mail

Quebec-Ontario electricity trade is smart, but not simple - The Globe and Mail:

Last week, Quebec’s and Ontario’s premiers announced their desire to work together on crucial issues, including climate change, interprovincial trade and infrastructure. It is very positive for Canada when our two largest provinces recognize the benefits of co-operation. We should certainly hope they succeed, but let’s also be mindful of the obstacles in their way

Especially interesting is the prospect of greater interprovincial trade in electricity. This would be a game-changer in Canada, and a very positive one. Quebec has a great deal of low-cost hydroelectricity available to export, and its current U.S. markets are becoming less interested in purchasing long-distance hydro power because of their own development of low-price shale gas. At the same time, Ontario’s economy continues to grow but has few options for increasing its electricity capacity at costs anywhere close to Quebec’s. So the idea of Ontario buying electricity from Quebec is obviously sensible.
Any idea that is so obviously sensible must have serious problems, and there are at least three that come to mind.
The first will be the pressures from within Ontario to resist importing cheaper Quebec electricity. It will be argued that Ontario has built a world-class nuclear industry and that refurbishing existing nuclear plants and building new ones is necessary to keep this expertise at home. The fact that approximately nobody in the rest of the world wants to purchase this expertise or the associated technology will be ignored, or perhaps held up as an example of how government needs to do more to sell these products. Other “anti-importers” in Ontario will argue along the lines of securing jobs and economic development – that building electricity capacity (of any kind) within Ontario keeps the projects and associated construction jobs at home.
Though they may be dressed up and spun differently, these arguments are nothing more than simple protectionism. Hopefully Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne will see this and focus on the bigger picture: In a world where Ontario needs electricity and Quebec has it in spades, it can only be good for Ontario to purchase it.
This brings us to the second obstacle, and it will come from la belle province. Quebeckers have no problem with selling their surplus electricity to Vermont and New York at prices that exceed the internal Quebec ones. Except in a few small industries, Quebec firms do not see themselves as competing with American ones.
But many won't want to make the same offer to Ontario, as they will see it as giving an advantage to competing firms. Indeed, Ontario will argue that having access to Quebec’s cheaper power will improve the competitiveness of its firms; so it’s only to be expected that Quebeckers will view the same transaction as causing their own competitive decline.
Again, these arguments are nothing more than raw protectionism, and hopefully Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard will resist them strongly. Quebec as a whole will benefit by selling its surplus power to any jurisdiction prepared to pay the price; it will also benefit if the consequent greater development in Ontario leads to more trade in other products between the two provinces, which is very likely.
The third obstacle is the toughest. Suppose Ontario and Quebec enter into a long-term partnership in which Ontario’s electricity needs are increasingly satisfied by Quebec’s production. This would be great for both provinces. But increasing Quebec’s electricity capacity means the construction of more hydro generating stations, and this will require more development in Quebec’s northern regions. This will certainly require the close involvement of First Nations communities.
First Nations communities will demand genuine consultation at every step of the project, and that close attention be paid to the project’s impact on the environment and on traditional hunting and fishing grounds. They will also demand a share of the income generated. The Quebec government will need to recognize the legitimacy of these demands and partner with the First Nations in a genuine and transparent manner. All of this is possible, but it is not simple.
To any objective observer from far away, greater electricity trade between Ontario and Quebec would appear to be a no-brainer. And it is. But there are real obstacles. We should all celebrate the fact that Premiers Wynne and Couillard are starting this much-needed conversation, and we should wish them all the luck in the world. They will need it.

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Ontario opposition would seek green energy changes

Here's an article that I feel is important for Ontario solar, wind and hydroelectric developers, supporters, opposition and voters to be informed about.  
I understand the concerns of the Progressive Conservatives. Any new government's decisions and actions must well thought out. Analyze and understand the near term benefits and longterm impacts to the greater renewable industry involved (developers, operators, manufacturers, installers, communities, First Nations etc.).

If new rates are deemed fair and justified, the industry and the rate base will understand.  Threatening to kill the Green Energy Act (feed in tariff, related programs and procedures) without an immediate system in place will reboot a repeating industry boom and bust cycle that Ontario's renewable industry has experienced over the last 3 decades.  
Read below:

By Nicole Mordant

VANCOUVER, Jan 12 (Reuters) - Ontario's opposition Progressive Conservative Party would overhaul the province's feed-in tariff program for producers of renewable energy if it wins the October provincial election because it is too expensive, a party leader said on Wednesday.

The Conservatives, who have a double-digit lead over the governing Liberal Party in opinion polls, would also comb through existing contracts handed out under the incentive plan to see if changes can be made, said John Yakabuski, who is in line to take over as energy minister if his party takes power.

"Going forward, absolutely, we would not be signing these contracts," Yakabuski said.

"We are not going tear up contracts, but I can tell you we are going to look at each and every one of those contracts to see what options we have," he told Reuters in an interview.

Ontario, Canada's most populous province, has attracted billions of dollars in investment from foreign and domestic producers of renewable energy since it launched North America's richest and comprehensive feed-in tariff program late in 2009.

The program, which is aimed at creating jobs and eliminating coal-fired power plants to cut greenhouse gases, pays above-market rates under 20 year contracts to solar, wind, water and biomass power producers who meet certain criteria.

Ratepayers, who bear the costs of the program, have started to complain as their monthly power bills have risen.

"The problem is that the consumer pays and that is the tremendous, terrible wrong of their program," Yakabuski said.

He said the Conservatives were in favor of closing down coal-fired power stations and encouraging the development of renewable energy, but contracts for new power had to be awarded through a competitive bidding process.

The Conservatives have not yet issued their official energy policy but will do so well before the Oct. 6 election, he said.

The biggest investor in the Ontario green energy program to date is a consortium led by South Korea's Samsung C&T (000830.KS: Quote), which was awarded a C$7 billion ($7.01 billion) contract a year ago to build wind and solar projects and set up manufacturing plants.

Other foreign investors include Germany's Siemens AG (SIEGn.DE:Quote), which plans to build a wind turbine plant in the province, Bosch Solar Energy AG (BSLRF.PK: Quote) and Japan's Marubeni Corp (8002.T:Quote).

"I think the posture of the Conservatives is slowing some investment," said Michael Carten, chief executive of Sustainable Energy Technologies Ltd (STG.V: Quote), which has partnered with Bosch to build solar modules and inverters.

"I am sure that some of the big players are saying 'I have to see some continuity on this, let's see what will happen after the fall'," he said.

($1=$0.99 Canadian) (Editing by Rob Wilson)

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Industry Insight: Hydroelectricity: The Versatile Renewable

http://www.hydroworld.com/index/display/article-display/7205041011/articles/hydro-review/volume-29/issue-1/lead-story/industry-insight_.html





Hydropower in North America is experiencing a renaissance. As a result, equipment manufacturers are being flooded with orders to provide equipment for projects using improved conventional technology and new, emerging technologies.
As one of the earliest and most elementary forms of power generation, hydropower remains by far the largest source of renewable energy in the world, including in North America.
In the early 1900s, hydropower was the dominant source of U.S. electric generation. As recently as the 1940s, hydro facilities accounted for more than 40 percent of electricity production. By the 1950s, developers had tapped the hydro potential of the most mountainous regions in the U.S. – many in the Northwest – where steep inclines supply the strongest river flows and permit the most cost-efficient projects.
Hydropower supplies almost two-thirds of Canada's power and makes it the world's largest hydropower producer, representing 13 percent of global output. This country also is the world's second largest exporter of hydro (after France). Altogether, its roughly 450 hydro plants, half of which have a capacity of less than 10 MW, account for 72,660 MW. Another 1,800 MW of capacity currently is under construction, and an additional 12,000 MW are being considered for development, according to the Canadian Hydropower Association.
Today, hydro represents about 8 percent of all power in the U.S. and more than 90 percent of all the renewable power generated in the U.S. Hydro provides more than 16 times as much energy as wind and solar power combined.
Hoover Dam, on the Colorado River between Nevada and Arizona, impounds water for two powerhouses that provide a total capacity of 2,078 MW.
And hydro's use is increasing, both through updates to older generating technology and through new technologies. Utilities are proposing more than 70 projects that would boost U.S. hydroelectric capacity by at least 11,000 MW over the next decade.
Driving a new wave of hydropower development is unprecedented demand for renewable energy and rising fossil fuel costs. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and other programs include tax provisions to attract investment in incremental hydropower; hydro at non-powered dams; and ocean, tidal, and in-stream (hydrokinetic) technologies.
Upgrades and new builds
American Municipal Power (AMP) owns and operates power production facilities for 126 member entities in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky. AMP is developing six hydro projects, representing one of the largest deployments of hydroelectric generation in the U.S. The projects are run-of-river facilities to be installed at existing dams on the Ohio River and on the New River in West Virginia. Combined, these projects would add more than 380 MW of new generation at an estimated construction cost of more than $1.5 billion.
As part of the project, AMP signed a contract worth more than $300 million with Voith Hydro to manufacture turbines and generators for the first three of these projects at the Smithland, Cannelton, and Willow Island locks and dams. A fourth Ohio River project will be at the Captain Anthony Meldahl Locks and Dam. In addition, AMP is pursuing a project (called Robert C. Byrd) at the Gallipolis Lock and Dam on the Ohio River and performing a feasibility study for a project at the Bluestone Dam on the New River.
Another company, PPL Corp., recently received approval of its request to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to expand its Holtwood plant, on the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania, by 125 MW. Holtwood currently is rated at 108 MW and has generated power since 1910. PPL said that incentives in the federal stimulus package could make the project feasible by offsetting the factors that caused the company to cancel its original plans for expansion in December 2008. Construction of the estimated $440 million project could begin in February 2010 and be complete by spring of 2013.
The boom in construction of larger hydro projects internationally has provided benefits to developers of smaller projects in the U.S. and Canada. "The hydro business is so robust right now that the contractors only go after big projects, leaving lots of room for smaller players to stay busy with medium and smaller projects," said Norm Bishop, senior vice president of hydroelectric and renewable energy for Knight Piesold. Knight Piesold is an international company of consulting engineers and environmental scientists who work in a variety of fields, including hydropower, wind energy, and mining.
In addition to the demand for renewables and the rising costs of fossil fuels, Bishop cites hydro's flexibility that allows it to meet today's power market demands. These demands include ancillary grid support, which is especially critical in places with increasingly high penetrations of wind farms.
And the potential to make cheap power from water has barely been tapped. Of the existing dams in the U.S., only 3 percent (or around 2,400) are equipped to produce power. These facilities annually generate 270,000 gigawatt-hours (GWh), according to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). DOE estimates another 30,000 MW of capacity could be developed, including 17,000 MW at existing dams.
Pump it up
After decades of little or no development, pumped storage in the U.S. is seeing renewed attention. Between 2007 and 2009, FERC issued preliminary permits for more than 20 pumped-storage projects, representing a total capacity of more than 15,000 MW.
In early 2009, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said hydro pumped storage must be a part of a national plan to expand clean energy resources and to integrate variable renewable energy resources into the transmission grid. Chu said the U.S. has limited existing resources for storing energy, and most of what it does have comes from the 20,355 MW of pumped-storage capacity now in service.
National Hydropower Association (NHA) Executive Director Linda Church Ciocci said that expanding hydro pumped storage capacity will be a high priority for her association's new pumped storage council. "The federal government has no program to spur expansion of U.S. pumped storage," she said. "We advocate investment tax credits or other similar measures that can incentivize pumped storage development immediately."
One benefit could be changes to the licensing process, an initiative NHA has worked on for many years. The new process focuses on collaboration among agencies, which should reduce the amount of time required for a new or renewed license from 15 years to as little as three or four years.
Relicensing is hot right now as owners hope to reap even 2 or 3 percent improvements for a price tag that can be as low as $200 per kilowatt.
"There's a tremendous opportunity to repower and upgrade the mechanical aspects of existing facilities to increase output," said Don Erpenbeck, vice president of engineering firm MWH. He's particularly upbeat about some new technologies, such as ultra-low-head hydro, and emerging technologies such as hydrokinetic. "If a project is 20 years old, there's a good chance today's technology can eke out more power at a very small cost per kW," he said.
Water to wire = ultimate efficiency
Hydropower has always had high availability and quick ramping rates. No fuel is needed, just the volume and motion of the water. It also enjoys an overall efficiency unmatched by any other power source. Mechanical efficiency is high, and the only true efficiency losses are limited to line loss.
"Availability is pushing 90 percent with hydro, and on the mechanical side we hit 95 percent efficiency," Erpenbeck said. But some plants have lost as much as 10 percent of their efficiency due to the age of their turbine-generating units. New technology can reclaim that efficiency and even increase output above previous levels. "You could be looking at up to 20 percent efficiency increases if the existing machines are in bad shape," he said.
The new turbines being installed at the 1,038-MW Wanapum project are fish-friendly and also will increase efficiency by 3 percent per unit over the old turbines.
Hydro's ability to ramp quickly enhances its attractiveness as a power portfolio asset. New technology can expand that flexibility. "We can make the efficiency curve flatter, so hydro is more efficient running off peak," said Erpenbeck. "We can now run with even greater flexibility and respond to market conditions across a wider range of megawatts in terms of cycling, load following, and turn down."
Erpenbeck said hydropower can routinely operate at 55 to 100 percent of rated load and back off to 20 to 40 percent as needed.
Increases to operating range provide prime quality spinning reserve for grid support, which is more important today than ever before. The increases are achieved through the ability to run in condensing mode where the generator is synchronized and motoring while the turbine spins air, or synchronized at low power (20 to 40 percent of rated load) and going to full power in seconds. For example, a single unit in the Third Powerhouse at the 6,809-MW Grand Coulee project on the Columbia River in Washington State can go from low load to full load (about 800 MW) in a matter of seconds.
Technology improvements
Improvements to conventional hydro technology provide a variety of upgrades that help hydropower remain low cost while offering environmental benefits.
Grant County Public Utility District in Washington State is installing ten $15 million fish-friendly turbines at its 1,038-MW Wanapum project and plans to replace another ten turbines at 855-MW Priest Rapids. The old turbines are being replaced with models that use six smaller blades instead of five. When completed in 2012, the work is expected to improve each turbine's efficiency by 3 percent and the Priest Rapids facility's overall capacity by 15 percent.
Recent upgrades to the Sacramento Municipal Utility District's 154-MW Jaybird and 82-MW Loon Lake powerhouses have led to still more efficiency gains. Installing new computerized controllers to better regulate water flow to the turbines increased output by 15 MW for the same amount of water when running at low power levels. The new governor control system automatically regulates the Pelton nozzles.
With the old equipment, the controller opened all six needles at once, boosting water flow to the turbine as electricity demand rose. When the unit was at low load, it required less water. But this fanned out of the needles similar to a garden hose set to a wide spray pattern and caused most of the water to miss the turbine wheel.
The new equipment opens two needles initially and adds others as demand for power rises. By moving the same volume of water through two needles instead of six, the water stream is more tightly focused and hits the turbine wheel more directly. This results in significant water savings for the same amount of power generation. Based on current short-term power price forecasts, the utility estimates the equipment will save it $130,000 a year.
Canada's two largest hydro utilities – Ontario Power Generation (OPG) and Hydro-Quebec – continue to expand capacity. Hydro-Quebec's expansion plans include completing the last generating units at the 385-MW Peribonka development and the first units at 62-MW Chute-Allard and 76-MW Rapides-des-Coeurs.
Work also proceeds at the utility's 906-MW Eastmain-1-A/Sarcelle/Rupert jobsite. The project will divert a portion of the flow from the Rupert River watershed into the Eastmain River watershed. The complex will involve four dams, a spillway on the Rupert River, 74 dikes, two diversion bays, and construction of a 1.8-mile-long tunnel and a network of canals and hydraulic structures on the Rupert River to maintain post-diversion water levels along half of the river's length.
OPG's Niagara tunnel project will increase the amount of water flowing to turbines at the 2,000-MW Sir Adam Beck complex at Niagara Falls, allowing the utility to better use available water. When the 6.5-mile-long tunnel is complete, average annual generation from the Beck stations is expected to increase by about 1,600 GWh. In April 2009, OPG completed a 12.5-MW hydroelectric station on the English River. The new Lac Seul facility uses most of the spill currently passing the existing 18.5-MW Ear Falls generating station, thus increasing overall efficiency, capacity, and energy generated from the plant.
Operation of the first of two turbines at Mississippi Lock and Dam No. 2 heralded the opening of the first commercially-operational hydrokinetic station in the U.S.
OPG also is proceeding with the definition phase for a 450-MW development on the Lower Mattagami River, including replacing the 52-MW Smoky Falls station and expanding the 136-MW Little Long, 140-MW Harmon, and 158-MW Kipling stations. The company also approved redeveloping four existing stations, which otherwise would have been removed from service.
New wave for hydropower
The tremendous force of moving water is obvious to anyone who has stood in breaking ocean waves or swum against a river's current. Ocean, tidal, and instream technologies generate electricity from waves or directly from the flow of water in ocean currents, tides, or inland waterways. This technology is gaining increased attention.
Hydrokinetic technology uses stream flow to make power and requires a steady 3 to 5 knots of flow to operate. Hydrokinetic water turbines can be placed where there is no dam; for example, they may be attached to bridges or to frames on the river bottom. Hydrokinetic technology boosts potential capacity far beyond conventional hydro power. As one example, thousands of miles of canals in California are designed primarily for irrigation but could also host hydrokinetic turbines.
Hydrokinetic turbines are smaller than wind turbines because water is about 800 times denser than air. Ocean tidal currents can deliver a predictable 20 hours per day of energy, and a hydrokinetic turbine can produce up to four times more energy than a wind turbine on a good day. Venturi and centrifugal designs can accelerate water speed through the turbine and double the energy produced. Current project proposals suggest that energy produced by U.S. waves, tides, and rivers could provide a capacity of 13,000 MW by 2025.
In August 2009, officials celebrated the opening of the first commercially-operational hydrokinetic power station in the U.S. The first of two turbines was installed and operational at the 4.4-MW Mississippi Lock and Dam No. 2 facility, in Hastings, Minn., This installation will use two hydrokinetic units, each with a nameplate capacity of 100 kW. The second unit is expected to be installed in 2010.
Near-shore and offshore ocean waves might have the greatest hydrokinetic potential. Extracting just 15 percent of the energy in U.S. coastal waves would generate as much electricity as is currently produced at conventional hydro projects. Much of this wave potential is along the Pacific Coast and close to population centers.
Beyond the sheer size of the resource, ocean, tidal, and in-stream resources are attractive because of their predictability. Wave patterns can be predicted days in advance. Because the kinetic energy in a stream is related to its speed cubed, extracting the most electricity from each hydrokinetic project will depend heavily on site selection. Energy output increases eight times with only twice as much water current speed.
State and federal policymakers across the U.S. have taken notice of the potential of hydrokinetic energy and have begun to support its development through legislative and monetary means. Ocean energy is eligible for credit under renewable electricity standards in 16 states and for federal renewable production tax credits, as expanded in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Furthermore, hydrokinetic energy development was marked for increased research funding appropriations in the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act.
Overcoming environmental opposition
Hydro has all but disappeared from the energy options usually cited by renewable energy advocates. Many environmentalists have long opposed hydroelectric power and do not consider it "green" or renewable. Much of the opposition is based on the water diversions required by traditional hydroelectric projects and the effects on land and wildlife. Fish killed as a result of passing hydro turbines has also led to a substantial amount of environmental concern.
Because of this environmental opposition, some states restrict the extent to which hydroelectric projects may qualify under renewable portfolio standards. "Policy makers at the federal and state level have a difficult task of designing regulations and incentives that recognize the fact that an existing renewable source like hydropower can be further developed with the right incentives," said Michael Cutter, vice president of engineering and development for Brookfield Renewable Power. The company has developed, owned, and operated hydro facilities for more than 100 years and has 100 hydropower facilities totaling nearly 2,000 MW in nine U.S. states.
Cutter said opportunities exist throughout the U.S. for continued development of hydroelectric generation. "Recent studies show the amount of hydropower could double from the current amount of installed hydro generating capacity by 2030 if the country could upgrade existing hydropower, add hydropower at non-power dams, and develop some of the new technologies," he said. "To reach hydropower's potential, it is important to continue to strengthen federal and state energy policies and to educate the public on hydropower's role as an indigenous, renewable energy source." 

Steve Blankinship was associate editor of Power Engineering magazine, a PennWell Corporation publication. This article originally appeared in the June 2009 issue of Power Engineering. Blankinship passed away in 2009. 

Monday, January 3, 2011

When is it right to redevelop hydroelectric sites?

It is a question that many in the industry are familiar with. There are many concerns when developing renewable energy projects. The most important concern is the environmental impact. Ultimately, renewable energy's selling feature is that it provides greater environmental benefits than not doing it. In most scenarios, there are cost benefits to any new development. My feeling it that the redevelopment of already impacted areas provides an opportunity to maintain the existing impacts and the resulting adapted environment with the creation of renewed green energy production. Water is already the greatest form of renewable energy. Waterpower is commonly viewed as reliable, reactive and renewable. It has been described as a source of energy "more than renewable". I agree. So important to the energy mix is that hydro is used as the perfect and only large scale support system for the wind industry. Where we can dramatically curb the new environmental impacts and provide this source of energy, it is my feeling that we should take all means necessary to support the redevelopment and refurbishment of our heritage green energy assets.
Many of these sites are seen as too small, or too aged to attract large corporate investment. This has caused an environment of less than optimal usage of the flowing resource, and in some cases the abandonment and removal of these sites.
When we are promoting new renewable technologies, we need to also be supporting our proven suppliers and encourage their continuing operations. Support can come from local communities, government initiatives, school level education programs demonstrating its history and benefits, and supplying to an informative discussion so as to avoid broad generalizations on hydroelectric development that have tarnished the good.

Core Components of the Green Energy Act of Ontario

Ontario Green Energy Act

In 2006, Premier McGuinty set a precedent in North America by introducing the Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program - the most progressive green energy initiative in more than twenty years.

In that same year the Ontario Power Authority began work on the Integrated Power System Plan – a 20-year plan that will determine how Ontario’s electricity system will evolve.


A great start. But not enough to get us where we need to go.


We need the Ontario Green Energy Act to propel Ontario into a leadership position in renewable energy, to reduce our pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, to create meaningful jobs for Ontarians and to enhance community economic development for rural, remote and First Nations communities.

Ontario Bill 150, Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009

Bill 150 was tabled at the Legislative Assembly of Ontario on February 23, 2009 and passed into law on May 14, 2009.

Official Liberal Party of Ontario Website for Ontario's Green Energy Act

Ontario's governing Liberal party has created a website providing explanation and information on their proposed Green Energy Act. Find it here.

Green Energy Act Introduction Testimonials - February 2009

Read what's being said about the tabling of the Green Energy Act by the Government of Ontario.

Green Energy Act Executive Summary

The Ontario Green Energy Act will make Ontario a global leader in the development of renewable energy, clean distributed energy and conservation - creating thousands of jobs, economic prosperity, energy security, and climate protection.

Proposed Green Energy Act

On December 10th at Queens Park in Toronto, a proposed draft of the Ontario green energy act was released titled: "An Act Granting Priority to Renewable Energy Sources to Manage Global Climate Change, Protect the Environment and Streamline Project Approvals". The draft will be under constant revision so please read it and send us your feedback.

Core Components of the Green Energy Act

The ten key points that define the goals of the Ontario Green Energy Act.

Sustainable energy unplugged: Making the connection

Getting connected to the electricity grid is proving a formidable problem for sustainable energy generators. A green energy act would oblige utilities to connect renewable energy.

Beyond the RESOP and the IPSP

Ontario’s Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program (RESOP) was the most progressive green energy initiative in North America for more than twenty years.

http://www.greenenergyact.ca/Page.asp?PageID=1224&SiteNodeID=202&BL_ExpandID=44


Ontario Waterpower Association's view

Renewable Energy

Waterpower: Ontario's primary source of renewable energy

Today, Ontario's waterpower resources comprise about 26% of the province's energy supply-with an installed capacity of 8,150 Megawatts. Nuclear power accounts for 41%, fossil fuels (coal, gas, oil) for 32%, and other renewables (wind, solar etc.) for 1%.

An Energy-efficient Source of Electricity

  • The average facility converts energy to electric energy at a rate of between 75% and 95%.
  • A typical waterpower generating facility has a long life cycle of between 75 and 100 years.
  • The average energy payback ratio (energy required vs. energy produced) is by far the highest among all sources.
  • Relative to other sources, the production of waterpower could be considered a form of energy conservation.

A Province Rich in Water Resources

  • Ontario has more than 250,000 lakes and tens of thousands of kilometres of rivers and streams.
  • About 50 systems support all of Ontario's waterpower production. Fewer than a dozen account for more than eighty percent.
  • Niagara Falls comprises almost a quarter of the installed capacity.
  • Waterpower facilities are located within 10 km of every major town and all cities in north-western Ontario.

Realizing the Potential for Clean, Renewable Waterpower

  • An inventory of waterpower potential in Ontario identified 2,000 sites with basic hydraulic conditions (regularly flowing water and change in elevation) to produce waterpower energy.
  • Just 200 sites have been developed in the last century.
  • Distance to the transmission grid, other natural resource values, and the demand for renewable energy are important factors in realizing waterpower potential.

Sustainable Energy: an Asset for the Future

  • Like other natural resources, Ontario's waterpower resources must be managed and developed to meet present needs and anticipate the requirements of future generations.
  • The waterpower potential that remains in Ontario should be treated as an asset that can continue to contribute energy, now and in the future.
  • Acknowledging and protecting this potential will increase our energy options for the future.