HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2014, 10:46 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 12,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadillaccc View Post
You're honestly telling me you don't see a very large difference between this:

If that is the case, we have absolutely nothing left to discuss.
A large difference? No.

All I said was that they reminded me of eachother, I don't know why you find that to be such a big deal.

I think the CT livery looks dated, one reason may be that it reminds me of a dated look used by another city. I don't know why that is such a big deal, or why you seem to find it so hilarious...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2014, 10:58 PM
VIce VIce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedog View Post
Not from a purely technical aspect
A purely technical view is a very, very incomplete picture. I don't see why people need to know that their power is not in truth generated exclusively from renewable sources any more than people donating to charity need to know that their dollars are going directly to the child that they "sponsor".

We don't live in a purely technical world. From the perspective of a deregulated energy market, if something is not economically viable it might as well not exist. You might be happy to say that you get the same fraction of renewable energy as people subscribing to Bullfrog while paying less, but the difference is they're doing something to promote renewable energy while you aren't. They put their money where their mouth is, and that is more important than the technical aspect.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2014, 11:32 PM
eemy's Avatar
eemy eemy is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,456
I sometimes wish there was a way to like or upvote posts on this forum software. In any case, I think VIce is absolutely right that there is still a meaningful difference between buying green power and not on a single grid. Even though you can't differentiate the sources, you are altering the market forces for different types of power by choosing who your supplier is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2014, 1:38 AM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 22,842
Yeah, I think that is what they've done.

The way I rationalize it is... if Calgary Transit hadn't done it, maybe that wind farm wouldn't be as large as it is today? Who really knows, but you can choose to either be pro something or con something.
__________________
Strong & Free

Mohkínstsis — 1.6 million people at the Foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 400 high-rises, a 300-metre SE to NW climb, over 1000 kilometres of pathways, with 20% of the urban area as parkland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2014, 2:09 AM
speedog's Avatar
speedog speedog is offline
Moran supreme
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,579
What you're missing is my main beef with those people who truly believe that all that's coming into their is green energy - they'll argue that none of their electricity comes from non-renewable sources.

As far as more green power, I'm all for it - I just wish people wouldn't wrap themselves in their "I'm saving the world" cloaks when sad reality is the things like Calgary Transit still probably uses more dirty power than clean.

It's an odd world that we now live in - buying green power that's really not green. Buying air rights to get around restrictions. Farmers finding saleable value in carbon credits in addition to the actual crops they grow and sell.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2014, 2:11 AM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 22,842
Oh, that isn't what I was saying.


Regardless, another cool aspect of the Ctrain system is how much energy is returned the the traction cable when the trains use their breaks. I've always found that fascinating.
__________________
Strong & Free

Mohkínstsis — 1.6 million people at the Foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 400 high-rises, a 300-metre SE to NW climb, over 1000 kilometres of pathways, with 20% of the urban area as parkland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2014, 2:26 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedog View Post
What you're missing is my main beef with those people who truly believe that all that's coming into their is green energy
What you're missing is the fact that none of the people you're arguing with actually believe that, they're simply arguing back at you because you're arguing at them.

Regardless of what kind of power plant C-Train's energy actually came from, the fact that they're paying a company to produce renewable energy means that somewhere, someone is using renewable energy instead of dirty energy whether they know or care about it, or not. The claim is certainly a half-truth but that doesn't mean the clean energy isn't there, and that's kind of what you're implying. Considering how energy moves it's probably not truthful to say you only use one kind of energy at a time. I've heard rumours from inside that Thunder Bay power plant that it's connected to New York's state grid, which sound implausible (I mean, it's directly connected to a mill across the river) but there have been times when the coal plant was down and the hydro dams were off-line and we had to depend on the GTA's nuclear plants, despite being over 1,000km away from them.

BTW, Calgary, running a transit system on renewable energy isn't a new thing. Thunder Bay's entire transit system was run on hydro-electric power until the 1940s, and the city owned both the transit system and the dam that powered it. (The dam still exists. The streetcars don't.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2014, 2:53 AM
VIce VIce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
What you're missing is the fact that none of the people you're arguing with actually believe that, they're simply arguing back at you because you're arguing at them.

Regardless of what kind of power plant C-Train's energy actually came from, the fact that they're paying a company to produce renewable energy means that somewhere, someone is using renewable energy instead of dirty energy whether they know or care about it, or not. The claim is certainly a half-truth but that doesn't mean the clean energy isn't there, and that's kind of what you're implying. Considering how energy moves it's probably not truthful to say you only use one kind of energy at a time. I've heard rumours from inside that Thunder Bay power plant that it's connected to New York's state grid, which sound implausible (I mean, it's directly connected to a mill across the river) but there have been times when the coal plant was down and the hydro dams were off-line and we had to depend on the GTA's nuclear plants, despite being over 1,000km away from them.

BTW, Calgary, running a transit system on renewable energy isn't a new thing. Thunder Bay's entire transit system was run on hydro-electric power until the 1940s, and the city owned both the transit system and the dam that powered it. (The dam still exists. The streetcars don't.)
Thunder Bay is definitely connected to New York, along with the rest of Eastern North America (less Quebec and Texas; most of the time). However, how tightly coupled it is with New York will vary with time. The vast majority of the time, Thunder Bay will be so extremely loosely coupled with, say, Orlando that they can be considered practically isolated, but in reality there is some physical connection between them.

One of the primary business models for wind energy in Alberta, which has some of the most valuable wind energy real estate on land, is selling its energy to California where the value of carbon offsets are the highest (within the Western Interconnection). Although Alberta is only loosely coupled with California, they are both part of the same electrical grid and so Albertan utilities can legally sell their carbon offsets in California.

This may seem like a subversion of the system, but ultimately it benefits the addition of new wind energy in that the market for wind energy in the Western Interconnection is predominantly affected by synoptic scale weather, rather than smaller weather structures (which will affect the local spot price of electricity, but not the value of carbon), reducing risk for both buyers and sellers and lowering the barrier of entry.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2014, 12:36 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
But the way they were phrasing it, was that the power plant doesn't serve us at all, and only supplied New York, or Toronto, or whichever large city was on their mind that day.

Electrical grids don't work like that. If they did, the assumptions about green energy that speedog is trying to refute would be true!

Northwestern Ontario isn't very well connected to the grid, either. We currently lack the capacity to export our energy in bulk, and until recently no one was allowed to install renewable energy here for fear of overloading the grid. We've since shut down two coal plants and eliminated the risk.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:29 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.