General Infrastructure Discussion

[osirisboy]

Solar panels still work and are effective in cloudy weather.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The best case for solar is probably the interior. They get a lot of sun and have cheaper land.

For utility-scale solar, yes. But solar panels on a private building in Vancouver can still result in long-term savings and, if widely deployed, kick the development of new utility-scale renewable projects down the road. The question for BC Hydro and the government is whether the amount of subsidies needed to drive more investment in private solar panels would be more or less cost effective and practical compared to damning another river or deploying off- and on-shore wind.

Previously, it would take homeowners at least 20 years to recoup the investment through the electrical load offset at today’s average electricity rates. Today, at an average of $2.50 per watt, the typical payback period for a homeowner in Victoria is about 17 years.

A typical solar PV installation on a residential roof is seven kilowatts (kW) in size with 16 solar panels, which in B.C., generates 7,700 kWh of electricity over a year.

Link

p.s. I know Vancouver is a little less sunny than Victoria. But Kisai's point was solar power could provide some backup power in the case of emergencies or power auxilary systems like on-demand bus shelter warmers, and that's a valid point from a macro perspective, even if the installation of solar panels isn't as much of a slam-dunk for a property owner in the Lower Mainland compared to property owners in the Okanagan or the southern prairies.

[CanSpice]

New Westminster put solar panels on two of its buildings, one in 2018 and the second in 2019, both of which are 50 kW arrays with an annual energy production of about 57 MWh. Sure, that's only about 0.2% of BC Hydro's production, whereas New West has about 1.4% of BC's population, but this was also just a kind of pilot project. Every little bit of microgeneration, even in the Lower Mainland, helps offset some of the energy production.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

New Westminster put solar panels on two of its buildings, one in 2018 and the second in 2019, both of which are 50 kW arrays with an annual energy production of about 57 MWh. Sure, that's only about 0.2% of BC Hydro's production, whereas New West has about 1.4% of BC's population, but this was also just a kind of pilot project. Every little bit of microgeneration, even in the Lower Mainland, helps offset some of the energy production.

Does NW Hydro post statistics for their production? Would be interesting to see how they do on cloudy days

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Solar panels still work and are effective in cloudy weather.

To a lesser extent. Higher albedo and cloud cover means the capacity factor of a solar panel in Canada is, on average, only 2/5ths of an equivalent panel in the States (page 90).

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by mcj

Does NW Hydro post statistics for their production? Would be interesting to see how they do on cloudy days

Yep they do, but only going back seven days. Here are the pages for Queensborough Community Centre and New West City Works.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Yep they do, but only going back seven days. Here are the pages for Queensborough Community Centre and New West City Works.

Thanks Brad! Seems like they haven't cleared the snow off them though

[Rudiger1]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Well BCH used to be a net exporter up until about 5 years ago, now we are a net importer. That's a pretty significant change, and we don't have unlimited interconnects with neighboring utilities and we shouldn't assume they have unlimited cheap power to supply us either.

This is wrong. BCH has generally always been about net neutral for imports vs exports. Some years we import on a net basis, other years we export on a net basis. It depends on the hydro conditions.

BCH has always been profitable (even when a net importer) due to the flexibility of the system and can use that flexibility to buy low and sell high, either during the hour, the day, the month, or seasonally.

Source: Me as I used to work for Powerex and https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analys...e-electricity-with-british-columbia.html

[Rudiger1]

Originally Posted by libtard

BC had a direct DC line to California for exporting

No the PADC runs from Northern Oregon at the Biggy Eddy substation near the Dulles to Sylmar substation north of LA. The DC isn't a straight line from BC to Cali. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie

BC has about 3GW of north to south transfer capacity between BC and WA and Powerex uses the PCDC to wheel power from BCH and the PNW to Cali.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Rudiger1

This is wrong. BCH has generally always been about net neutral for imports vs exports. Some years we import on a net basis, other years we export on a net basis. It depends on the hydro conditions.

BCH has always been profitable (even when a net importer) due to the flexibility of the system and can use that flexibility to buy low and sell high, either during the hour, the day, the month, or seasonally.

Source: Me as I used to work for Powerex and https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analys...e-electricity-with-british-columbia.html

All due respect you should look at the link I posted. I did correct my statement in that it hasn't been 5 years, but the last year or more BCH has been a significant net importer. Your link ends in May 2022.

[Migrant_Coconut]

That link only goes as far back as 2021. According to the CER (if I'm reeading it correctly), BC was in the black in '17, then red in '18 and '19, then black again in '20-22, so "neutral" seems to check out.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

i am happy as long as we use our hydro power to buy low, sell high by turning off turbines as necessary. decrease the maintenance and maximize the profits.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

who cares.

we offset it by being over 98% green power. so 16% of their power is fossil fuels. big deal. *yawn*

According to this article in BIV about 60% of the electricity BC Hydro had to purchase from outside sources was generated by fossil fuels. It also has a timely.reminder that the BC NDP fought tooth and nail against Site C when it was proposed and started construction.

Finally an interesting stat regarding Fortis who’s worth noting thanks to NDP policy leading to a rejection of their recent request to expand in the Okanagan:

[I]It's also important to recognize that during B.C.’s recent cold snap, FortisBC delivered almost double the energy of the entire BC Hydro network (nearly 22,000 megawatts at the highest point of demand, compared to BC Hydro’s 11,000 megawatts). This is because, even though very little electricity is generated by natural gas in B.C., about two-thirds of households use natural gas for heating.…[/]
https://biv.com/article/2024/01/opinion-bc-ndp-lacks-credibility-critical-electrification-file

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by whatnext

...during B.C.’s recent cold snap, FortisBC delivered almost double the energy of the entire BC Hydro network (nearly 22,000 megawatts at the highest point of demand, compared to BC Hydro’s 11,000 megawatts). This is because, even though very little electricity is generated by natural gas in B.C., about two-thirds of households use natural gas for heating.…

Yeah, residential heating is the big Achilles heel in BC's climate plans. There seems to be a move afoot to apply carrots and sticks to new construction in an effort to phase out natural gas heating, but to the extent that it's replaced by electric heating it means *way* higher overall demand and a corresponding need for more a lot more generation. Compared to the rate at which change can happen in the transportation sector, change in the residential sector will take much longer - buildings are replaced on a multi-generational time scale vs vehicles. Hopefully that will give BC Hydro and the other utility providers the time they need to keep pace.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Yeah, residential heating is the big Achilles heel in BC's climate plans. There seems to be a move afoot to apply carrots and sticks to new construction in an effort to phase out natural gas heating, but to the extent that it's replaced by electric heating it means *way* higher overall demand and a corresponding need for more a lot more generation. Compared to the rate at which change can happen in the transportation sector, change in the residential sector will take much longer - buildings are replaced on a multi-generational time scale vs vehicles. Hopefully that will give BC Hydro and the other utility providers the time they need to keep pace.

It's also worth noting that electric heat (in the form of a heat pump) is far more efficient than both gas heat and traditional electric baseboards when it comes to power used-->heat generated.

So how much overall power we will need is a factor of source and technology.

This is the same concept with EVs, that use a lot less power because electric motors are so much more efficient.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by whatnext

It also has a timely.reminder that the BC NDP fought tooth and nail against Site C when it was proposed and started construction.

oh i remember. polotics over facts; same thing the NDP did with the Massey Bridge. Fast Cats, etc

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Yeah, residential heating is the big Achilles heel in BC's climate plans. There seems to be a move afoot to apply carrots and sticks to new construction in an effort to phase out natural gas heating, but to the extent that it's replaced by electric heating it means *way* higher overall demand and a corresponding need for more a lot more generation.

i think the heating aspect will be the toughest for them to deal with. and they want to go to more solar/wind vs thins like hydro. and those work the least when people need the most heating. if they arent careful, we will have issues.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

It's also worth noting that electric heat (in the form of a heat pump) is far more efficient than both gas heat and traditional electric baseboards when it comes to power used-->heat generated.

true. though even my heat pump at ~400% efficient (ideal), vs my boiler at ~95%, means there is still 1/4 more power usage than before.

we will never phase out natural gas completely. heat pumps get very inefficient at low temps. when solar/wind doesnt produce much. theres a reason i set my combi-boiler as my backup heat when i hit about 1deg.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

true. though even my heat pump at ~400% efficient (ideal), vs my boiler at ~95%, means there is still 1/4 more power usage than before.

we will never phase out natural gas completely. heat pumps get very inefficient at low temps. when solar/wind doesnt produce much. theres a reason i set my combi-boiler as my backup heat when i hit about 1deg.

You can use resistance heating at that level to get the heat pump going though can't you? It's all possible, but could be expensive.

Plenty of low hanging fruit in the meantime.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Seeing as buildings are less than 12% of emissions (at least as of six years ago), maybe we've got bigger priorities than heating?

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

You can use resistance heating at that level to get the heat pump going though can't you? It's all possible, but could be expensive.

you can, but the boiler back up heat is cheaper at that point. its basically a small hydronic loop that goes into the air handler. based on outside temp it changes where it draws the heat.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Plenty of low hanging fruit in the meantime.

the problem is, cities are banning natural gas in new builds now... and if this becomes a thing in more cities, in 10yrs we could have a problem. i agree, we shouldnt be doing that. even in my energy efficient home, a natural gas combi-boiler is more efficient at cold temps vs electric/heat pump. if natural gas was banned i wouldnt be able to do it, and it would put much more load into the electrical grid; what these politicians are wanting.

thats the problem with these people. so much idealism, but no realism. its like the people who say "just build it!" got housing. its not that easy.

electrical, water, sewers, cant keep up with what these people want. not without massive, massive upgrades. even if we have the money, we dont have the ability to build that fast. it takes time to build the electrical grid, water system, sewer system. people think we can just throw up a bunch of housing and problem solved. no, no we cant.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

the problem is, cities are banning natural gas in new builds now... and if this becomes a thing in more cities, in 10yrs we could have a problem. i agree, we shouldnt be doing that. even in my energy efficient home, a natural gas combi-boiler is more efficient at cold temps vs electric/heat pump. if natural gas was banned i wouldnt be able to do it, and it would put much more load into the electrical grid; what these politicians are wanting.

Cities like Vancouver are, because heat pumps are clean and make much more sense in that climate.

I don't think cities like Prince George are banning natural gas.

Ideally we'd have a decent renewable natural gas feeder system in BC for those areas that need it, but we don't. The pipes are already in place and that would be the best outcome.