[Tron_fdc]

So is that 106 dams OR 6768 turbines OR 105k acres of panels? Or all of the above? Hydro, turbines and panels all come in different sizes of generation capacities as well. So that tweet is a little misleading.

The crux of the argument here, is that if Alberta was to build out power requirements using only solar and wind, is that in times of heavy demand and low power generation from those 2 sources, generation capacity from other sources would not be sufficient to supply the grid. I believe this happened in Germany and they had to import coal power from France.

In a deregulated Ab market this would mean massive price increases while demand was high because we don’t have the generation capacity to supply the demand and don’t have line capacity to import. Worst case would be rolling brownouts during winter.

Reliable capacity HAS to be available if that scenario were to happen. In the CER it mentions peak plants are free to run in those scenarios, but in a deregulated market who is going to finance and build them? If there’s a business case to build these plants it means power prices are high and our market isn’t functioning properly, and once it DID begin to function where these peakers aren’t needed what do you do with the plant you just built? Mothball it?

To me I think the easy answer is continue to allow renewable development, spend money on increasing line capacity to tie into BC, Montana, Sk while you build nuclear. Tie ins are probably the path of least resistance with an ultimate goal of net zero nuclear reactors. I’m no expert though.