Canada Now Firmly Headed For The 21st Century

“Two-thirds of Canada’s electricity supply now comes from renewable sources such as hydro and wind power, the National Energy Board said in a report released Tuesday.Renewable energy production jumped 17 per cent between 2005 and 2015. The portion of all electricity in Canada generated by renewables is now 66 per cent, up from 60 per cent a decade earlier.”
 
See Two-thirds of electricity in Canada now comes from renewable energy
Yes, Electra Meccanica’s Solo EV is right on schedule, as 2/3 of Canada’s electricity comes from renewable sources. It’s cleaner, it’s cheaper and it’s the way Nature intended…

If I plug my red Solo into the grid next year, I’m confident it will run on renewable energy, mostly from solar but partially from wind. Sun evaporates water which falls to Earth upstream of our dams and runs to the sea turning many hydroelectric generators. Sun and the rotation of Earth causes the wind too. So, thank you, Sun. When I set up a few solar panels and a wind turbine on my property, I will be certain my Solo EV will run on renewable energy. That and a swing for the grand kids and the grounds will keep me busy for one more year, all good reasons to go on living.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in family, horticulture, technology and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Canada Now Firmly Headed For The 21st Century

  1. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson My household, for instance, produces about one bag of waste per week and we compost it.
    And that composting could be a biogas plant. Ok you don’t have the large volume but one bag per week has been found enough to produce the gas required to cook a house hold food for a week.

    Meanwhile, a farming family can produce tonnes of biomass weekly but it’s far from a market for biomass.
    True and processing the biomass through a biogas plant on site produces pathogen free fertiliser and fuel for vehicles and excess for on-site power generation to sell. Sorry the far from market for biomass is wrong the market for the waste from biogas plant is a farm and a market for the fuel from a biogas plant is also farm. So this is a closed loop system with option of doing export as well.

    This is the problem everyone has looked at biomass as item to be sold instead of a material to service the locations own needs.

    To make biomass fuel work we have to get away from the central power-station model. Of course if farms were running their own biogas plants and selling to the power grid power companies would make less money.

    Biomass is not exploited because it does not suit the model of greed. Also biogas equipment to be cost effective needs some party to mass use it. So if the sewage treatment plants and land fill are required to-do biogas correctly the cost for farms and other large waste produces to-do it properly also comes down.

  2. oiaohm wrote, “issue here is like land fills and sewage treatment plants and other areas were we already transport and collect them”.

    While cities do waste lots of organic matter, it’s a trivial amount compared to the produce of many thousands of square miles of agricultural and forested lands. My household, for instance, produces about one bag of waste per week and we compost it. Meanwhile we use many kilowatt hours of energy. So, we can’t meet our needs with biomass personally. Meanwhile, a farming family can produce tonnes of biomass weekly but it’s far from a market for biomass. Instead farmers aim for higher value for their efforts like grains and vegetables and fruits. TLW objects to my planting of fruit-trees because of the biomass they will yield. She doesn’t appreciate that much variety and wants to restrict quantity. A good apple-tree can produce ~100 pounds of apples and we could fill our yard with 100 apple trees. Do the maths. I did grow corn and pumpkin successfully one year and produced ~1000 pounds of food on my small property. That’s huge compared to our household wastes.

  3. oiaohm says:

    The cost of collecting them, transporting them and returning the final residue is prohibitive except in a few cases, like intensive livestock operations or farms near cities but it’s not going to work everywhere.
    Robert Pogson issue here is like land fills and sewage treatment plants and other areas were we already transport and collect them we don’t operate correctly to start with. Over the complete system there is enough to meet our needs but if we can get by on a percentage due to wind, hydro there is enough in what we already collect up just processed correctly.

    The one big thing about if every land fill and sewage treatment plant become a power generation system location this would provide more spread based load power provide so make system more tolerant to storm damage. This would also mean more money would stay in local communities.

  4. oiaohm says:

    Grece you said the important figure. 500ppm. Why must we have 500ppm is so we breath. If you use a heart lung machine you take it under 500ppm so person stops breathing. Yes you can kill a person with too low of CO2 as well. Due to stopping breathing.

    We breathe the 40,000 ppm into victims needing CPR and it does not cause them to die!
    Very bad presume here. Could kill someone presuming this mistake due to not swapping CPR methods when you should. In fact people die from CPR being performed quite commonly because parties with equipment has not got them in time to change from human breath to direct atmosphere or other non human system for breathing before the fatality of CO2 strikes.

    https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/idlh/124389.html

    Debate is from 30000ppm to 50000ppm CO2 with 30min of exposure at that level equals dead if major muscles are active in the body. CPR at 40,000ppm is depending on the fact most of the person muscles are in relaxed low O2 using state. So yes if someone has nerve damage and they cannot breath yet the rest of their muscles are working and you perform mouth to mouth you can kill them.

    Yes breathing 40,000ppm into a person can kill them. If you have a choice of a other systems that don’t use human breath use them out come is better.

    Is CPR safe using human breath the answer is no it not. Why do we perform CPR using human breath:
    1) the tools to-do CPR without human breath will not be on hand.
    2) 30-50 mins to death performing CPR using human breath is better than 1 min to death as not performing CPR results in many weather conditions.

    This is a shocking one depending on the weather conditions performing CPR using human breath might be the biggest mistake ever. The correct weather conditions a person not breathing no heart beat and no CPR has a life span before correct treatment of at least 4 hours. Yep attempt human breath CPR in those conditions and you have cut their lifespan 1/4 to 1/8 of what they could have had for treatment.

    So yes incorrect usage of human breath CPR kills yet idiots still use CPR as some form of story that CO2 is safe.

    Of course when you are doing CPR on a person the person receiving CPR is not needing to think. After CPR you are meant to leave them in the recovery position for at least 5 min for their brain to return to normal functional levels. Basically when performing CPR the person brain function due to high CO2 are reduced.

    https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/15-10037/
    Of course we presumed the number was quite high before mental state was effected. Then someone did like above formal study. Found 1500ppm CO2 our brain functions are very major impaired with the start of impairment 600ppm.

    So at 1500ppm CO2 is unlikely to kill you directly but likely to make yourself dumb enough that you kill yourself. At 40,000ppm level from Human breath based CPR the person receiving that is insanely dumb and on the way to death.

    Does this mean you shit in the fields of citrus trees you pick? Hopefully you are aware, perhaps not, that such activities leads to food contamination.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-06/treated-sewage-product-biosolids-give-darling-downs-crops-boost/6355090
    Treated human shit end up on fields of citrus trees quite a lot. The treatment plant produces methane that can be harvested. Yes sewage in different places is turned into fertiliser. Same with some of the processing land fills.

  5. Grece says:

    Amen. Wilful ignorance is rampant in the land. The world would be a much better place if people gave thought to what they say/write instead of repeating “fake” whatever.

    Sigh.. CO2 is NOT a pollutant. CO2 is in our every breath. We breathe in 400 parts per million and then exhale 40,000 parts per million with no ill effects.

    We breathe the 40,000 ppm into victims needing CPR and it does not cause them to die!

    I deny absolutely that Carbon Dioxide has any warming properties whatsoever. A molecule may be warmed for a nano-second, but it cannot generate heat and it cannot capture or trap heat – that is impossibility.

    We already know that the total amount of atmospheric Carbon Dioxide is only 0.04% of the atmosphere. We also know that the figure for the human contribution from the IPCC is but 2.9%. If we round this up to 3%, then the total human contribution from the burning of fossil fuels amounts to 0.0012%, an amount that is so derisory that it is laughable.

    Human blood must maintain CO2 at a narrow range near 500 PPM or you get
    hypo/hypercapnia, so much for CO2 being a toxin.

    There is only one entity that can warm the globe with its radiation and that is the Sun. So who are the real deniers? Who are the deceivers?

  6. The Wiz wrote, “parroting of other peoples interpretations on climate and renewable energy”.

    Amen. Wilful ignorance is rampant in the land. The world would be a much better place if people gave thought to what they say/write instead of repeating “fake” whatever.

  7. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “Not that you say anything of worth exactly, but your self-inflated ego reminds me of one of those air dancing advertisers you see at used car lots.”

    I find it fascinating that you think that you actually have something of worth to say yourself, Dougie as far as Robert Pogson’s obsessions. Instead what we get is your parroting of other peoples interpretations on climate and renewable energy.

    As far as self inflated ego’s are concerned, the poster named Dougman whom the owner of this blog finally bounced had an ego to beat the band. In fact, you sound a lot like him more often than not – including the interest in bitcoin.

    So Are you going to come clean Dougie!

  8. oiaohm wrote about crop residues. There’s nothing wrong with recycling them. The problem is that they are fluffy and dispersed. The cost of collecting them, transporting them and returning the final residue is prohibitive except in a few cases, like intensive livestock operations or farms near cities but it’s not going to work everywhere.

  9. Grece says:

    Yep. I comment whenever I wish on whatever I wish…

    Watch out guys, We got us a bad-ass over here!

    Not that you say anything of worth exactly, but your self-inflated ego reminds me of one of those air dancing advertisers you see at used car lots.

  10. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “Terms?”

    Yep. I comment whenever I wish on whatever I wish…

    And you deal with it.

    Dougie…

  11. Grece says:

    When you make organic fertilisers

    Does this mean you shit in the fields of citrus trees you pick? Hopefully you are aware, perhaps not, that such activities leads to food contamination.

  12. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson fertilizing crops is a interesting one. When you make organic fertilisers part of the process is you produce methane. Most organic fertiliser production leaks methane into the atmosphere. Its a worst green house gas than CO2 and methane harder for plants to process.

    http://www.globalmethane.org/documents/analysis_fs_en.pdf
    Grece methane is one of the most under tapped fuels. Please note landfill as landfill if you capture methane from it is less than 5 percent of the methane compared putting that same material through a biogas production process(yes a process designed intentionally to produce methane).

    Yes the 760.63 MMTCO2E from the land fills in that document is less than 5 percent of what is extractable from the materials in landfill.

    Yes coal and gas production has been leaking methane into the atmosphere as well.

    The reality is we do have enough fuel from organic sources we are already using to service our needs if we are not wasteful with it. Boy do humans know how to be wasteful. Biogas alone done right could service our power needs yet we dig up coal and oil. Solar Wind and Hydro are basically icing on the cake.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_biological_treatment

    This above details how you land fill sites should look if it attempting to be effective. Refuse-derived fuel is frown on by some environmental groups. But there is quite a huge volume of fuel in land fill sites that really don’t have to be there. Also doing it right makes it a lot nicer for those living near landfill.

  13. Grece says:

    When I set up a few solar panels and a wind turbine on my property,

    What is your timeline on this Robert? How do you propose to stay in legal waters with CSA regulations and UL 1741, IEEE 1547 and 1547.1??

    Inquiring minds would like to know!

  14. Ivan says:

    Wouldn’t ‘the way Nature intended’ be you getting off your duff and walking instead of bragging on the internet about giving hourly workers mercury poisoning and cancer, known problems in the manufacturing process?

  15. Grece says:

    You haven’t even presented me with a ring yet, you pompous cheap ass!

  16. Grece says:

    Terms?

  17. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “I suggest as Robert would say, crawl back in your hole and shut-up.”

    When I last checked Dougie, you did not run this blog. Since Robert Pogson even allows a someone like you Dougie to continue to post just because you use a new name.

    So until such time as Robert Pogson bounces your new name from his blog, you get to deal with me on my terms.

  18. Grece wrote, “~46 TWh. There is not enough biomass in Canada to create that much energy.”

    That’s not true at all. It’s just that Canadians have better uses for it like fertilizing crops and making garden-soil and building homes. Canada may be a cold place but, in the south, many crops are grown and in the north there is a million square miles of forest. Biomass is exploited for energy locally to avoid costs of shipping so there are point sources exploited rather than nationally. e.g. Many forestry projects derive much of their power by using sawdust, wood-chips and trimmings for energy, usually just by burning the stuff. A furniture factory in Winnipeg uses wood waste for heating. Even in the old days when I was a boy, we burned crop residues by making smudges, small smokey fires to help cattle rest free of mosquitoes.

  19. Grece says:

    Grece there are 3 major prototype plants around the world doing biogas from human produced wastes.

    Dummy, we were discussing Canada, not the rest of the planet you idiot. You never did answer my question fool: How in the hell do you derive 20% out of the 36% as used now?

    36% of 651.8 terawatt-hours (TWh) is ~234 TWh, 20% of that figure is ~46 TWh. There is not enough biomass in Canada to create that much energy.

    But lets be real, you are full of shit, the only think you could offer humanity is your residual carbon-footprint and help a Saskatoon tree grow!

  20. oiaohm says:

    Grece there are 3 major prototype plants around the world doing biogas from human produced wastes.

    How in the hell do you derive 20% out of the 36% as used now?
    The 20% is not derived out of the 36%. The 20% is out of the volume of power that comes out of processing everything we as humans send in garbage bins and sewage lines.

    That 20% is from methane sources we humans are reasonable for creating.

    There are not enough cows or Canadians that shit enough to produce that much waste to be a equitable solution.
    You are right about 5% shit. 15% food waste and other biodegradable wastes we dump all the time. So one of the biggest untapped power source is where you are land filling without proper processing.

    There is a USA dump that full recycles what ever it can out of human dumped wastes. This provides the scary figure of about 15 percent of a person power needs go out in bins per day. Please note this is not just house hold bins this is business bins.

    I seriously would like to know how many kilowatt hours of power, can you get from the bullshit that comes out of your ass everyday.
    Reality here this is another topic where you don’t have a clue grese. Go look up on the rates of garbage humans produce and the methane yield that is possible 15% is in fact conservative. Yes we talk about wind and solar a lot we fail to talk about processing the waste products we produce effectively in areas like Canada those wastes are highly yield than solar and all year round. Biogas can be made from paper waste and a lot of other packing materials. Biogas can come from garden wastes.

  21. Grece says:

    Dummy, do you have any clue, as to what the hell you are even talking about? How in the hell do you derive 20% out of the 36% as used now? There are not enough cows or Canadians that shit enough to produce that much waste to be a equitable solution.

    I seriously would like to know how many kilowatt hours of power, can you get from the bullshit that comes out of your ass everyday.

  22. oiaohm says:

    Grece hydro is power storage.

    Coal, Nuclear and Hydro can fill this role adequately

    Coal is not really required. Notice no biogas in Canada numbers. Biogas can be recovered from dumps and other human and animal wastes.

    ~36% really 20 percent of that can come from processing the waste humans produce effectively. Canada wind is not tapped fully.

    There are a lot of studies into biogas from sewage treatment plants and dumps on how much base load that can provide. Its about 1/5 of our power usage and canada has not deployed that yet. Canada wind capacity should be around 15-20 percent when tapped. If the required difference was still over 50 percent then you might have and a point.

  23. Grece says:

    Can’t be done? Robert is the one always rambling on about Wind and Solar, of which I respond that Wind and Solar is NOT capable of providing enough base-load capacity to support demand. Coal, Nuclear and Hydro can fill this role adequately, Wind and Solar cannot.

    Furthermore, the leading type of power generation by utilities in Canada is hydroelectricity, with a share of (60.1%), nuclear (15.8%), natural gas (10.3%), coal (10%), wind (1.8%), fuel oil (1.2%), biofuels and waste (0. 8%), wood (0.4%) and solar (0.1%) follow.

    So you see, all the Canadian public and private electric utilities realize this fact. Robert’s solution would be to have 1.9% of generation, derived from wind and solar. To somehow magically makeup for the loss of ~36% when hydrocarbons and nuclear power is no longer allowed. See the discrepancy? Of course you do.

    I suggest as Robert would say, crawl back in your hole and shut-up.

  24. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “DERP.”

    Did you bother to read the article Dougie?

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/two-thirds-of-electricity-in-canada-now-comes-from-renewable-energy/article34879957/

    Quite impressive for something according to you can’t be done.

  25. Grece says:

    Robert, you pedantic idiot. We are already in the 21st century, we are heading for the 22nd century to be more precise. See, the 21st began on January 1, 2001 and will end on December 31, 2100.

    DERP.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *