HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1061  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2020, 10:29 AM
TownGuy's Avatar
TownGuy TownGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Cobourg, ON
Posts: 3,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaskScraper View Post
Sorry, yes of course, lots of places in snow areas that undoubtedly have more snow, just checking places like Midland in Ontario & Quebec City, each has half a meter of snow on the ground & they still have several months of Winter to go.
You always have to get your little shots in no matter how. In this case that means using friggin Midland of all places. Who on this forum has even heard of Midland? It isn't representative of anything except a tiny fraction on the snowbelt. Several months left of winter is also hilarious.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1062  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2020, 1:29 PM
north 42's Avatar
north 42 north 42 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Windsor, Ontario/Colchester, Ontario
Posts: 5,806
^ Trolls will be trolls!
__________________
Windsor Ontario, Canada's southern most city!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1063  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2020, 2:12 PM
Bishop2047's Avatar
Bishop2047 Bishop2047 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by TownGuy View Post
You always have to get your little shots in no matter how. In this case that means using friggin Midland of all places. Who on this forum has even heard of Midland? It isn't representative of anything except a tiny fraction on the snowbelt. Several months left of winter is also hilarious.
Facts and logic are no fun when they don't fit your narrative. On the plus side I learned where Midland Ontario is today.... So I guess thank you SaskScraper.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1064  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2020, 4:42 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 21,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
The whole revenue neutral thing really is a political ploy that is going to have to be discarded eventually. In the end it doesn't matter much if the government rebates you or not or changes your income tax rate. The net result is the same.
So they should just increase a carbon tax and not reduce anything else? That will go over like a lead balloon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1065  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2020, 5:43 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
So they should just increase a carbon tax and not reduce anything else? That will go over like a lead balloon.
Correct, but despite the crying the end result is the same. At the point where eventually the carbon tax is simplified and rolled into general revenue, there will be some very intelligent people saying "see it was a tax grab all along lololololol" even if the alternative was instead to keep the rebate and raise tax revenue some other way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1066  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 1:50 AM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
Right now pilots have to switch fuel tanks at key times to maintain weight ratios. At least with electric, it's always going to be the same weight, and a ground-up design could place that weight (battery) in the most ideal places.
Fuel is in the wing so weight and balance are not affected as fuel is used. The centre of lift is normally at about mid-chord.

Take off weight of an electric is the same as landing weight. High landing weights are bad for aircraft.

Pilots swich tanks both as a safety measure and to provide trim in the roll axis.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1067  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 1:57 AM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubicon View Post
Electric engine is not the same as an internal combustion engine. It's probably not much of an engine at all. Battery weight would make up for fuel and engine weight reduction at least in part. The balance/centre of gravity of the aircraft would need to be carefully calculated.
The Harbour Air electric Beaver made it's first flight at full gross weight without any passengers or cargo. Major increases in battery energy density will be needed before any electric airplane is practical for revenue service.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1068  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 2:49 AM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 21,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
The Harbour Air electric Beaver made it's first flight at full gross weight without any passengers or cargo. Major increases in battery energy density will be needed before any electric airplane is practical for revenue service.
Not according to Harbour Air.

What numbers are you using?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1069  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 3:07 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
This morning it was -26 so there was no climate change but by the afternoon it warmed up to 0 and I was like "electric cars!!!!! Meatless meat!!"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1070  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 1:48 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ontario's feel good town
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
Not according to Harbour Air.

What numbers are you using?
At gross weight, cabin full of batteries.

https://www.skiesmag.com/news/harbou...beaver-flight/

Aircraft operated privately must carry enough fuel to reach their destination and an alternate airport. Aircraft operated commercially are the same, +45 minutes. Don't know how they could possibly achieve that.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1071  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 4:23 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 21,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
At gross weight, cabin full of batteries.

https://www.skiesmag.com/news/harbou...beaver-flight/

Aircraft operated privately must carry enough fuel to reach their destination and an alternate airport. Aircraft operated commercially are the same, +45 minutes. Don't know how they could possibly achieve that.
From your article:

Quote:
“These are batteries that NASA is using, but they’re not batteries that we’d use if we were going to try and make it economical to fly today, because they’re very low in watt-hours per kilogram,” explained McDougall.
They are already planning for the full reserve requirement:

Quote:
It’ll be a while until the operational procedures and infrastructure requirements are worked out, but McDougall has been told by the propulsion system’s engineering team that recharging will be “a minute for a minute. Half an hour flight, half an hour recharge. Don’t forget you’re not charging the full battery, you still have the 30-minute reserve in the battery, so you’re going to be recharging from half.”
More specific from another article:

Quote:
The demonstrator Beaver carried 135Wh/kg lithium batteries – a relatively low-density battery that, while close to aviation standard, generally lacks sufficient power-density for viable commercial operations, McDougall says.

Today’s better lithium batteries generate up to 235Wh/kg, but McDougall expects 400Wh/kg batteries will be available by the time Harbour starts passenger flights.
The retrofitted plan was also at least 500lbs heavier than a "built from scratch" version would be. Plenty of room for improvement. This was a proof of concept.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1072  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 4:38 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
We are going to have a cold 36 hrs, and by cold only a few degrees lower then our historical norm. Then back up to above norm. This has been a great winter so far but I know this is not a good thing. So much for the long cold winter they called for in the Almanac.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1073  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 7:35 PM
lubicon's Avatar
lubicon lubicon is offline
Suburban dweller
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary - our road planners are as bad as yours Edmonton
Posts: 5,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
Pretty obvious, but:

Most Canadian households will get more than they pay from carbon tax: PBO


https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/most...-pbo-1.4796511

It seems like all major CPC leadership hopefuls are still running on cancelling the carbon tax.
Does this account for indirect carbon tax costs? Ie increases in goods, transportation etc. that are going to be passed along to consumers but you never see on a bill. I'd be surprised if it did.
__________________
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.

Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1074  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2020, 9:27 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 21,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubicon View Post
Does this account for indirect carbon tax costs? Ie increases in goods, transportation etc. that are going to be passed along to consumers but you never see on a bill. I'd be surprised if it did.
They are looking at total government revenues, so that's all costs.

https://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/web/defaul...0-024-S_en.pdf

Costs will be "passed along" to consumers as much as the market will bear. Forward thinking businesses will work to remove these costs from their operations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1075  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2020, 12:33 AM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Yeah it's not hard to calculate the total cost to consumers, in fact it's incredibly easy. It's just the total tax received.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1076  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2020, 4:01 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 lubicon View Post
Does this account for indirect carbon tax costs? Ie increases in goods, transportation etc. that are going to be passed along to consumers but you never see on a bill. I'd be surprised if it did.
Last time I saw a carbon tax on a bill at work, it was on a $345 freight bill. Do you know how much was listed under the carbon tax line?

It was seventeen cents.

Pretty fucking hard to pass that on to a customer when you've sold them 120 of something. The carbon tax is far too low to have any real impact. I paid $44 in carbon taxes on gasoline in 2019, got $244 back. I'm going to use my tax refund to fly somewhere so, there the fuck goes the carbon savings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1077  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2020, 4:05 AM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
Last time I saw a carbon tax on a bill at work, it was on a $345 freight bill. Do you know how much was listed under the carbon tax line?

It was seventeen cents.

Pretty fucking hard to pass that on to a customer when you've sold them 120 of something. The carbon tax is far too low to have any real impact. I paid $44 in carbon taxes on gasoline in 2019, got $244 back. I'm going to use my tax refund to fly somewhere so, there the fuck goes the carbon savings.
The carbon price is what, about 5% of the cost of fuel. So unless only $3.40 of fuel was used for that shipment, then that's not the whole carbon price. And if it was, then they're doing a great job of keeping their fuel use down!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1078  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2020, 4:12 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 milomilo View Post
The carbon price is what, about 5% of the cost of fuel. So unless only $3.40 of fuel was used for that shipment, then that's not the whole carbon price. And if it was, then they're doing a great job of keeping their fuel use down!
It was a 200km LTL shipment that weighed six tonnes. That company's freight bills are the only place I've seen a carbon tax charge. It's otherwise pretty negligible. The largest price increases we've dealt with this year involve anything that is supplied from China via the US. In some cases the tariffs and exchange rates and "dollar surcharge" fees are doubling the cost of goods. So much for free trade? One of our suppliers moved to Ohio because the owner in Alberta sold it to a guy who lives there and instead of him moving to Alberta, he moved the company and its employees to Ohio. Then a few months later, sold the company to a larger Canadian company that's based in Alberta but is keeping the warehouse in Ohio because it's already there and that's easier.

Still, it's all too little too late. The cost of building dykes around Vancouver because sea level is breaching the seawall and partially submerged their airport during high tide are going to cost a fuck of a lot more than 4.4 cents per litre of gas. And have you seen the moose with 80,000 ticks in New Brunswick?? Won't be long now before those weird ticks from Texas that make people allergic to meat start showing up in Toronto.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1079  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2020, 7:01 PM
SaskScraper's Avatar
SaskScraper SaskScraper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Saskatoon/London
Posts: 2,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by north 42 View Post
^ Trolls will be trolls!
It's not nice to call TownGuy a troll, no matter how true it is

I have an interesting story about Cobourg, Ontario if you have probably never heard of the place before.

Quote:
On 20 December 1951, Cobourg experienced media attention as a chartered Curtiss C-46 Commando airplane, bound for Newark, New Jersey, made an emergency landing in local farmer Charles Wilson's field, alongside Highway 2 and Roger's Road. The pilot had lost his way after losing radio contact, and unwittingly drifted north. The 44 passengers and three crew escaped unhurt, but extremely cold in the sub-zero temperatures. The plane, having crash landed on deep snow, was able to be repaired and the field smoothed out enough for it to get airborne again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop2047

Facts and logic are no fun when they don't fit your narrative. On the plus side I learned where Midland Ontario is today.... So I guess thank you SaskScraper.
Glad I could expand your horizons

When I mentioned that there's a wide swath of half meter deep snow from one large body of water like Georgian Bay/Cottage Country all the way to another like the Gulf of St Lawrence, I was thinking of how Winter is all encompassing in Ontario and Quebec, and that deep snow in those two provinces is just ordinary and unremarkable in those parts, but I guess I could just as easily have said the same thing by saying Ottawa also has a half meter of snow on the ground & therefore very representative of those two provinces

Quote:
Originally Posted by CityTech
In southern Ontario/southern Quebec, an increase in winter temperatures does generally mean more snow. It's why river flooding is such a symptom of climate change out here - warmer temperatures result in more snowfall in winter and faster melts of that snowfall in spring.
here's hoping for a slower warm up for Ontario and Quebec to deal better with higher snow accumulations that will become more frequent with climate change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1080  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2020, 8:16 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/most...-pbo-1.4796511

"The finding, which comes nearly four months after the majority of Canadian voters cast their ballots for parties that favoured some form of carbon tax, appears to bolster the Liberal government's argument that Canadians will not be negatively affected by the tax."


I mean we can listen to our elected officials, or we can get our alternative facts from the fat cats running the oil companies. We know who the Conservative's listen to.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:39 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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