These types of articles drive me insane. They do it with medicine too. Some think tank with a bias publishes a "study" and it's taken at face value. The Fraser Institute is literally funded by coal producers and O&G. They "study" wind energy and say it's too expensive... using costs from years ago of $118/MW when it's now $38/MW and still falling. They also incorrectly use the assumption that coal powers 40% of generation (it's below 30%). It makes me so frustrated when we've got an existential crisis we need to move fast on, yet you have these @$$#oles actively trying to slow it down for a buck.
https://beta.ctvnews.ca/local/calgar...33075.amp.html
Quote:
|
The Fraser Institute, an independent Canadian public policy group, says data they've examined shows that if Alberta shut down its coal-fired power plants, which account for about 40 per cent of the province's energy generation, it would have a marked effect on greenhouse gas emissions. It estimated they would drop by between 26 and 40 per cent
|
Quote:
|
"Based on cost estimates from Alberta, and Ontario's experience with subsidies to renewable energy, the costs of relying on changes to electricity generation (essentially eliminating coal and replacing it with renewable energy sources and gas) to reduce national CO2 emissions by about 7.4 per cent range from some $16.8 billion to $33.7 billion annually. This constitutes some one to two per cent of Canada’s GDP."
|
Then it ends with this wonderful inuendo:
Quote:
Late last month, ATCO announced it would be building two solar power generation projects in the city of Calgary.
The Barlow and Deerfoot installations would generate 27 and 37 megawatts of power, enough to power more than 18,000 homes for a year.
Construction is expected to commence next year.
ATCO did not reveal how much it would cost to build the projects, which would be the largest in a major urban centre in Western Canada once completed.
|
Do they reveal how much it would cost to build any other non renewable generation projects?