Good points on energy efficiency, but it’s not free
Jim Harris, former Green Party leaders and columnist in the Financial Post, actually makes some good points in today’s column.
He is correct that most thermal power plants have efficiencies in the 33% range, rejecting two-thirds of the energy in the fuel as waste heat. Newer plants, like Capital Power’s Genesee 3 near Edmonton which raise supercritical steam have efficiencies higher than this, approaching 50%. Combined cycle power plants using natural gas can reach efficiencies nearing 60%. But some of the fuel energy must leave the plant as waste heat. The second law of thermodynamics demands it.
What Jim is proposing is that we utilize this waste heat (simply put, this is energy available at temperatures below 150°C). One option would be to route hot water (or some other fluid) from the power plant around our cities to heat homes. This is done in some parts of the world, and would be an option in some places in Canada. The power plants at Pickering, Darlington and Nanticoke are in the middle of urban areas. But the coal fired power plants at Wabamun, AB are 50 kilometres from Edmonton. And Bruce is nearly 200 km from Toronto. Pumping hot water great distances is going to cost a lot of money, which consumers will have to pay for. So this won’t be free. And the raw materials to build these distribution networks are going to consume a lot of resources… Running 6-8″ hot water lines to every house is a lot more metal than the 1″ natural gas lines or 1/4″ copper wires… But show me how much it is going to cost me, the consumer, and I will consider it.
Jim Harris gives some credit to industries that are already doing this. But he should give credit to the industry that has perhaps done this on the largest scale – the oil sands. TransAlta’s Poplar Creek cogeneration plant at Suncor uses the waste heat from power generation to heat the water needed for oil sands extraction. This displaces the burning of other fuel to heat this water. They can claim an energy efficiency of over 90% for this reason, and on a 356 MW power plant. So Jim – how come you didn’t point to that one?
Jim also makes some good points about a Smart Grid for power distribution. The technology exists to do this today. I want it. I also want my power consumption charged based on an instantaneous power price so that consumers will have an incentive to reduce power consumption at peak hours. And so that if I put a solar panel on my roof I can get credit back from the power company when I’m not using the power. Of course, I will have to pay for this technology – but smart technology just keeps getting cheaper. So let’s do this now!
Jim may have a useful idea about the smart power grid, and the ability to bill based on peak usage, but what happens when the remote operator decides that your power use NOW is not necessary, or does not fit into the larger social objective. It will be just like waiting lists for health care. A few people dying (the Supreme Court and mathematics says it happens) will be OK if the ideology is intact. Spare me the Central Planner/Operator. Please.