KC375

Members
  • Content Count

    1,380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

KC375 last won the day on September 3

KC375 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

594 F'n Saint

About KC375

  • Rank
    Super Anarchist

Profile Information

  • Location
    Northern Hemisphere
  • Interests
    family, sailing, skiing, travel

Recent Profile Visitors

1,297 profile views
  1. KC375

    Brexit, WTF

    Suddenly it all makes sense
  2. KC375

    Sail Georgian Bay? Sign this.

    (Just to trigger all the anti-nukes). I've got a solution to reduce greenhouse gasses, avoid all the headache of wind and solar, and avoid the scenic tragedy or water storage on Georgian Bay. What Ontario should do is lay on a bunch of nuclear power – enough to fully cover peak demand. Very low carbon footprint. Make a big contribution to Paris climate commitments. Then use all the excess capacity at nonpeak time to produce aluminum – which is basically bauxite used to solidify electricity. It’s no accident that Alcan is in Quebec, the land of cheap hydro electricity. Canada is the worlds 4th biggest producer of Aluminum yet doesn’t hit the map as producer of Bauxite. It’s all about the hydro – of Canada’s 12 Aluminum plants 11 are in Quebec and the 12th is in BC powered by hydro from Kitimat.
  3. KC375

    Sail Georgian Bay? Sign this.

    Fair enough if Teslas and other plugins start using up the excess nightime capacity then there will be no benefit to shifting that capacity to peak use...of course that means that then some daytime peak capacity will need to be added. If you doubled the number of electic cars in ontario and had them all max charge at the same time you would start to eat into the surplus capacity at night - for the few hours they were all at peak charge. Realistically you would need something like 10 to 20 times the number of electric cars in ontario to use up the baseload capacity at night. Until then why not use up the wasted base load capacity by shifting it to peak daytime use.
  4. KC375

    Sail Georgian Bay? Sign this.

    Blunted I’m sorry if it looked like my rant was aimed at you. I quoted you just to come to the defence of DND as you would not expect the department of defence to be able to defend themselves. Clearly I should have used sarcasm font for the reference to Oakville – that was caricature of NIMBYism and political expediency and skulduggery. The people of Ontario were forced to pay about a billion per seat the Libs gained – there should have been jail time. Generally I’m comfortable with your observations except for your assertion that it’s the solar and wind supply that lead to the need to for shifting power from off peak to peak and the impact of energy exports. Maybe I'm missing something. If so I’d be delighted to be educated...I’m an enthusiastic if slow learner. My impression from the three images below (Ontario demand, supply and net imports for Oct 11 – 16): The peak demand seems (surprisingly enough) to correspond to peak supply from wind and solar. The two largest sources nuc and hydro are structurally (nuclear) and economically (nuclear and hydro) well suited for base load generate at capacity supply so the ability to move energy from periods where this capacity is above demand e.g. 0:400 to periods where it is below demand e.g. 19:00 seems the big driver of the Georgian bay stored water project. Ontario imports more power than it exports with no day showing net export.
  5. KC375

    Sail Georgian Bay? Sign this.

    In fairness I don’t think you can count on DND ineptitude stopping this as all DND is providing is the land. It does not take a lot of execution skill to step back and let someone else build on land you’ve given them access to. What can stop this is public pressure through the permitting process and at the political level. The public pressure will be most effective if it is applied in a broad sustained way AND the advocacy is reasonable and rational. Objecting to a private sector participant making money is not a winning argument in a market based economy in a reasonable functioning democracy. An argument might be made that the profit margin is excessive compared to the risk and therefore this should be done as a government owned and run utility. I think the track record of such ventures in Canada suggest the private sector approach would deliver lower cost of power to consumers – but feel free to do the analysis and argue otherwise. Objecting to using 30% extra power in order to provide peak power is not a winning argument unless it is supported by careful analysis showing that there are better ways to meet the peak power demand or to reduce the peak. You might deal with the peak through pricing and other mechanisms to reduce the size of the peak – so you would have to make the case that x# of people are OK paying more and modifying their behaviour to avoid this project being built. Alternatively one could identify another source of peak power – realistically that is probably gas powered generation – so more greenhouse gases and +/- capital outlay and +/- operating cost and +/- time to come on line. The attractiveness of alternative sources of peak power will depend on the economics, construction time, and your views on systemic costs of greenhouse gases. I’m sure the good citizens of Oakville would welcome a gas powered plant in their neighbourhood. The plans and feasibility studies are readily available to speed the process. Of course there is the Tesla argument that there are better ways (i.e. batteries) to shift the energy from off peak generation to availability for peak consumption. I think there are at least three hurdles for this approach. 1. I don’t think the economics support it (yet). 2. Batteries have some significant costs not properly priced into them – take a look at the life cycle of all the components and is not yet a “clean” technology. 3. It looks like for a while there may be shortages / high prices for the best battery technology – if so is this where you want to deploy that resource. So if you want to object it seems the most effective basis would be the impact on the scenic beauty of the area and on fish life. Those can be powerful and effective arguments especially if you reinforce them with a link them to credible estimates of lost tourism income and employment. Focusing on supportable objections might lead to adjusting the project to reduce its actual negative impact. That might be in the form of effective protection for fish etc. (good luck with that but not out of the question) and modifications to reduce the scenic impact (would probably still be ugly but maybe less ugly). It might lead to modifications like storage at both ends rather than using Georgian bay for the lower reservoir...If the same elevated reservoir and same drop is used that then means massively more scenic impact at the bottom end and acquiring a lot of additional land (maybe not on offer from DND). It might lead to moving the project somewhere else – or abandoning the project with the possible result that a gas fired plant gets build instead.
  6. KC375

    Coolboats to admire

    For a while Jimmy Buffet had the larger sibling, named Red Head
  7. KC375

    Brexit, WTF

    Any views on witch ditch Boris should end up in? This is the one Gahhafi ended his run in:
  8. KC375

    Lionheart Lost Cape Brett NZ?

    Just for clarity, UNAMED YACHT LOST CAPE BRET NZ in similiar circumstances to the loss of Lionheart in 1983
  9. KC375

    Brexit, WTF

    Not much has changed since 1934
  10. KC375

    Brexit, WTF

    Reliability of UK implementing treaties put in question by court ruling UK court rules against Derry woman in Irish identity case Citizenship case raises questions over why UK law has not incorporated Good Friday rights The Home Office challenged the ruling, arguing that not all the contents of the agreement had been incorporated into British law and therefore the rights in the Good Friday agreement did not trump those in the 1981 British Nationality Act. ... .. Ireland had amended its domestic law after the 1998 peace deal to deliver the agreed rights. Questions will now be asked as to why UK domestic law was not amended likewise... ...international treaties such as the GFA were entered into under royal prerogative but that this prerogative “does not extend” to altering domestic law without the “intervention of parliament”. .. ...“Quite simply, a treaty is not part of English law unless and until it has been incorporated into the law by legislation,” ... ...Northern Ireland Act of 1998 which gave effect to certain provisions in the Good Friday agreement did not touch on self-identification and nationality and this “was entirely deliberate on the part of the United Kingdom”. ... Even with a treaty signed by the UK...you can't actually count on the UK honouring their commitment. Add to that the known mendacity of the PM why would the EU even bother trying to paper something with the UK
  11. KC375

    World Sailing - doing their bit...

    A quick sampling of big US and EU cities gave me Bermuda in the 10 to 15% farther. Given the burn for taxiing and takeoff...yes Halifax would be a bit less fuel ~10% range not what I'd call "much less". But of course Halifax is a much more interesting and cosmopolitan location,
  12. KC375

    Brexit, WTF

    As I wrote earlier, I think there is an aspect of the government you experience driving your comfort. I would be much more comfortable with most northern European governments honouring the controls on access to personal data than I would be with either the UK or the US. I believe most EU countries have a genuine respect for privacy and rules about personal data. In the US the Director of National Intelligence lied to Congress about the degree of information gathering on Americans...not really the behaviour to engender trust in the people with the data and the spyware. If the intelligence community lies to its own oversight bodies then presumably they are comfortable deceiving everyone and bypassing reasonable constraints. So in 5 eye countries, and in particular the US and UK...I’m less comfortable. Although maybe I should be more realistic. The only people the US intelligence community have any constraints against spying on are US nationals and residents while in the US.
  13. KC375

    Brexit, WTF

    I don't think it is the carrying ID that is the issue (although the evil fascist in the black and white movies always start by asking to see your papers - and regardless of the uniform)... I think it is the idea of "registering" and not being able to operate in a different are/jurisdiction without re-registering. That sense that a malignant authority would know where to find you, could collate all the information on you to profile you, to make life affecting judgements about you... The truth is that is already happening but for some people its very scary. Here is the story of a 13 year old in the UK who in a classroom discussion of environmental activists mentioned the term “ecoterrorist” because of the second half of that word and because he was Muslim his teachers reported him to the “Prevent” programme. The next school day he is subject to an intervention/interrogation in school (no parents or advocates present) – even though the investigators concluded he was not a young bin laden this kids name and info is now part of national police database that will have his name surface every time the authorities are looking for the “usual suspects”... (I wouldn't be surprised if the Netherlands have much better privacy and due process protections than the UK does...but for now why would you want UK functionaries to have any more information and power given they can't handle what they already have).