Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 143
  1. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    1,111
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckcrj View Post
    How could an electricity bill be called a hydro bill if the energy was supplied by solar, coal, or natural gas?
    It's a canadianism. Like how you Americans call soft drinks "soda" and we call it "pop"

    The condenser clearance issue was not from a gas meter, it was from a furnace vent termination.
    Mike Holmes' theory was that the unburnt gas ejected during a trial for ignition would be ignited by the contactor on the a/c.... Idiot

  2. #28
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    Posts
    3,588
    Quote Originally Posted by syndicated View Post
    It's a canadianism. Like how you Americans call soft drinks "soda" and we call it "pop"

    The condenser clearance issue was not from a gas meter, it was from a furnace vent termination.
    Mike Holmes' theory was that the unburnt gas ejected during a trial for ignition would be ignited by the contactor on the a/c.... Idiot
    I call it pop but upper Michigan is pretty close to Canader eh. That's why I never take a **** near a condenser, if they get a call for cooling I don't want flames shooting out of my ass.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,253
    Quote Originally Posted by amd View Post
    You're full of crap because solar can't replace coal and an industry isn't a real industry if it has to be subsidized to survive. What we have is a "green energy" bubble that will pop as soon as the conservatives get in and rightly scrap the green energy act.

    Getting rid of coal to date has only been accomplished by building a lot of new gas fired plants, at the future expense of electricity and gas customers. (the switch to gas will cause gas rate hikes due to higher demand; electricity rates have already gone up dramatically)
    I would love to debate this with you but you have no knowledge so I would get bored quickly.

    I will just say that you can then get rid of the NUC industry because it is heavily subsidized, you can get rid of the tar sands oil because for the last 30 years it has been heavily subsidized and you can get rid of Niagara Falls power because it too was subsidized. Why do you even remotely think you can get away with paying $.10/kwh for power in Canada without ever having used the government as a financing institution. Not in this country, nor any European country and not even in the US (as I believe most of the early transmission system had govt loans or loan guarantees).

    If you love coal power so much, you can live down wind from it and expose your kids to it as well. People don't want it....even conservatives. There are lots of gas plants out there and, guess what, we are at the lowest gas prices that we have seen in many years.

  4. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,253
    Quote Originally Posted by syndicated View Post
    It's a canadianism. Like how you Americans call soft drinks "soda" and we call it "pop"

    The condenser clearance issue was not from a gas meter, it was from a furnace vent termination.
    Mike Holmes' theory was that the unburnt gas ejected during a trial for ignition would be ignited by the contactor on the a/c.... Idiot
    I don't think Mike Holmes has ever heard about the "limits of combustion". I doubt you will ever see 4% gas/ air ratio in free outside air let alone 14% from a 100Mbtu furnace

  5. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,411
    Quote Originally Posted by SolarMike View Post



    If you love coal power so much, you can live down wind from it and expose your kids to it as well. People don't want it....even conservatives. There are lots of gas plants out there and, guess what, we are at the lowest gas prices that we have seen in many years.
    I like and want coal power plants. I can hop in my car and drive to a couple in less than an hour. I can see one from the family lake house. Its good cheap power and keeps Americans working using our resources.

  6. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,253
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtime View Post
    I like and want coal power plants. I can hop in my car and drive to a couple in less than an hour. I can see one from the family lake house. Its good cheap power and keeps Americans working using our resources.
    So do other sources of power and they don't have to be so bad for the lungs

  7. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    1,111
    Quote Originally Posted by SolarMike View Post
    I would love to debate this with you but you have no knowledge so I would get bored quickly.

    I will just say that you can then get rid of the NUC industry because it is heavily subsidized, you can get rid of the tar sands oil because for the last 30 years it has been heavily subsidized and you can get rid of Niagara Falls power because it too was subsidized. Why do you even remotely think you can get away with paying $.10/kwh for power in Canada without ever having used the government as a financing institution. Not in this country, nor any European country and not even in the US (as I believe most of the early transmission system had govt loans or loan guarantees).

    If you love coal power so much, you can live down wind from it and expose your kids to it as well. People don't want it....even conservatives. There are lots of gas plants out there and, guess what, we are at the lowest gas prices that we have seen in many years.
    Tar sands? Not subsidized I promise. Subsidizing? Yes.
    The oil sands are the only reason your premier dad can afford to pay solar producers over .80c Kw/h for solar.
    If equalization wasn't in effect, Ontario would have already gone bankrupt!

    By the way solar mike, they're called Oil Sands.
    "tar sands" is for the NDP

  8. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Gainesville, FL
    Posts
    325
    Around here power costs .102 per Kwh from the municipal power company and you get .132 per Kwh if you "feed-in" solar to the grid. Sure does feel good to the morons that came up with it though. Big buildings all over town are covered in solar panels, and the city and utility customers lose money every time one of them catches a ray of sunshine. Probably explains why this city has the highest rates around.

    Next they're building a "biomass" power plant instead of a NG plant, even though the NG plant that was proposed would have cost less to run and maintain. Sure does feeeeeeeel good though.

  9. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    I don't know
    Posts
    2,903
    By the way solar mike, they're called Oil Sands.
    "tar sands" is for the NDP
    I'm with solarmike on this one - they're tar sands.

    Oil flows, tar does not.

    It's dirty, crappy tar which has to be mined and processed into oil; doing so wastes a huge amount of natural gas and fresh water which could be put to better use.

    The worst part of it is that most of the oil produced gets exported.

    Tar sands? Not subsidized I promise. Subsidizing? Yes.
    The oil sands are the only reason your premier dad can afford to pay solar producers over .80c Kw/h for solar.
    If equalization wasn't in effect, Ontario would have already gone bankrupt!
    "Premier dad" is a ****en idiot.

    As for Ontario going bankrupt, the high dollar (caused by tar sand development) along with a drive to outsource manufacturing to the third world is responsible for that.

  10. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    1,111
    Quote Originally Posted by amd View Post
    I'm with solarmike on this one - they're tar sands.

    Oil flows, tar does not.

    It's dirty, crappy tar which has to be mined and processed into oil; doing so wastes a huge amount of natural gas and fresh water which could be put to better use.

    The worst part of it is that most of the oil produced gets exported.



    "Premier dad" is a ****en idiot.

    As for Ontario going bankrupt, the high dollar (caused by tar sand development) along with a drive to outsource manufacturing to the third world is responsible for that.
    Lol, stop reading the Toronto star. Even mark carney doesn't buy that Dutch disease nonsense.
    The high dollar is not solely caused by the oil sands. The real value of our dollar has not increased nearly as much as the value of the US dollar has declined.
    If it weren't for the oil sands in Alberta, the gas and mining booms in BC and Saskatchewan this country would be a shambles.

    You're operating on old information on the oilsands as well. It is not NEARLY as water intensive as it used to be, in fact most water is recycled and those tailings ponds will be eliminated as most producers move towards in situ extraction.
    All Canadians should feel proud and fortunate we have these resources to take advantage of while the rest of the world flounders.

    I was born and raised in that hole called Ontario, moved to Calgary at 25. I can tell you that the country looks different once you've escaped the gravitational field of Toronto. I encourage all canadians back east to stop buying into mcguinty's nonsensical ravings. It's easy for him to blame everyone else!

  11. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    I don't know
    Posts
    2,903
    I will just say that you can then get rid of the NUC industry because it is heavily subsidized, you can get rid of the tar sands oil because for the last 30 years it has been heavily subsidized and you can get rid of Niagara Falls power because it too was subsidized. Why do you even remotely think you can get away with paying $.10/kwh for power in Canada without ever having used the government as a financing institution.
    Subsidies and investments are two different things.

    It's okay for governments to finance construction of hydro dams because the revenue brought in over the operating life of the generators can be used to service/pay off the debt incurred.

    The green energy act is a little different...

    Solar doesn't have a decent return on investment (neither does nuclear, which bankrupted ontario hydro - but at least reactors can produce base load power), nor does the government directly finance the purchase/installation of the equipment.

    So, rather than buying wind/solar electricity at a reasonable cost that the market can bear, "Premier dad" raises the rate for solar to 40-80 cents per kwh, and the rate for wind above 10 cents per kwh with a stroke of a pen.

    Rich people buy expensive solar panels as an investment, get payed above and beyond what the electricity is worth, and the average hydro user foots the bill.

    The expensive solar panels/wind turbines fail to produce base load or dispatch-able power, so conventional power plants still have to be operated.

    Mr. Hudak gets elected, the green energy act gets repealed, and the green energy bubble pops, taking thousands of jobs with it; ratepayers then pay the price for the next 20 years*.

    Great plan!

    ---------------------------
    But, I know I just wasted a few minutes typing this post, because a solar panel installer isn't likely to admit that the green energy act is a terrible piece of legislation any more than a realtor would admit that there's a housing bubble in Toronto.

  12. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    885
    Quote Originally Posted by amd View Post
    You're full of crap because solar can't replace coal and an industry isn't a real industry if it has to be subsidized to survive. What we have is a "green energy" bubble that will pop as soon as the conservatives get in and rightly scrap the green energy act.

    Getting rid of coal to date has only been accomplished by building a lot of new gas fired plants, at the future expense of electricity and gas customers. (the switch to gas will cause gas rate hikes due to higher demand; electricity rates have already gone up dramatically)
    Just for your general information. Oil and Coal, are subsidized by the USA federal government. To compete, solar has to be subsidized as well. Before condeming "green" tech you might wanna find out if the current tech could stand on it's feet first.

    Lets be clear I want all subisides ended, because it messes up the markets, and causes things like Ethenal gas.

    Oh btw, you have fossil fuel subsides up in canada as well. The playing feild really does need to be evened out.

  13. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,253
    Quote Originally Posted by syndicated View Post
    Tar sands? Not subsidized I promise. Subsidizing? Yes.
    The oil sands are the only reason your premier dad can afford to pay solar producers over .80c Kw/h for solar.
    If equalization wasn't in effect, Ontario would have already gone bankrupt!

    By the way solar mike, they're called Oil Sands.
    "tar sands" is for the NDP
    For the entire history of Canada, we had the right to put our canoe in ANY river and go where we want. Guess what......our esteemed PM took that right away years ago....all in a bid to prevent Greenpeace or any others to be able to take water samples and prove the massive pollution that spews from that area. Harper wants a dictatorship of the oil corporations and he is getting it. This point was about clean energy and they were called tar sands before oil sands but were rebranded to make it more palatable.

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event