[ RadSafe ] opg - Nuclear Power in Ontario

[Conway Lowe Family]

Hi Joe,
I was not sure if you were just  kidding us Canucks about 6 months of winter in Canada.  Northern Canada does have long winters  and of  course snowfall dose impact the availability of solar power.   But for the record, where most of the population in Canada lives, the winter is considerably shorter than 6 months.  By the way, Toronto (4th most populous metro area in Canada and U.S.) received zero snow this past  weekend, or much less than in New York, Washington, etc, :)

Relative to solar power, many parts of Canada also experience considerable sunny days per year.  Unfortunately, no sun at night.  Solar (and wind) power should increase as the costs decrease, and systems for power storage improve, but reliable baseline power sources will always be needed.  I don't see in practice how one could easily keep solar energy running for 85% of the year, in Canada or anywhere.  How could one do that? (FYI, Toronto averages about 40 snow days/year).

L. Lowe


-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Preisig [mailto:jrpnj01 at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2016 2:43 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] opg

Radsafe,
       Clearly nuclear power makes sense for Canada --- 6 months nice weather and 6 months winter, or so.  The effect of severe freeze/thaw on solar panels is probably not real helpful for their durability, longevity etc.  I'm not one to push solar energy all that much, but I can easily think of ways to keep solar energy running over times in Canada when it is not snowing.  Is that 85 % of the year or something else???  85 % is just a guess on my part.
      Since Canada is committed to nuclear power, I expect it will be around there for quite some time.  We seem to be able to extend the lifespan of well-working nuclear plants for quite some time.
     Joe Preisig




On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Conway Lowe Family <conlowe at bell.net>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I should have clearer in my message relative to installed capacity and 
> actual power output
>
> Only 13,500 MWe is nuclear, but nuclear has produced around 60% of the
> power in each of 2013, 2014 and 2015.   Unlike nuclear, wind and solar
> usually only provide a fraction of their potential installed capacity.
> Even when coal-fired plants were operating, nuclear provided over 50% 
> of Ontario's power.  See the percentages in the tables  at the site
> http://www.ieso.ca/Pages/Power-Data/Supply.aspx   given in my message.
>
> Cheers,
> Leo
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sfisher373 at aol.com [mailto:sfisher373 at aol.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:25 PM
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] opg
>
> Bruce has 6,300 MWe, Darlington is 3200 MWe and Pickering is 4000 MWe.  
> So only 13,500 is nuclear.  Rest is hydroelectric. But Pickering is 
> shutting down for good in 2022.
>
>
> Dear Radsafe,
>
> Yes, homeowners with solar and/or wind generators can sell power back 
> to the power grid, at least in the province of Ontario (population of 
> 13.8 M) where a large premium is paid to such generators.  The idea 
> was to stimulate the expansion of such renewable resources, but the 
> costs have been high.
>
> Fortunately, with a present total of over 35,000 MWe of  total 
> installed capacity (including the Bruce Nuclear station, the largest 
> nuclear power generating site in the world), most of Ontario's power 
> is GHG emission-free nuclear - over 60% in the last few years - with 
> only about 6% and <1% from wind and solar, respectively, in 2015. [See 
> http://www.ieso.ca/Pages/Power-Data/Supply.aspx ]  Wind and solar 
> power will increase, but they can?t provide enough 24-hour power.  Due 
> to nuclear, Ontario  has been able to close out 100% of its 
> GHG-emitting coal-fired plants.
>
> Many of the public apparently still want to phase out nuclear, but that's
> not going to happen, at least for a while yet.    Some of the present
> nuclear stations are slated to undergo refurbishment which will extend 
> their lifetimes , e.g. see 
> http://www.opg.com/news-and-media/news-releases/Documents/20160111_Dar
> lingtonRefurb.pdf
>
> Leo Lowe
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>