Why is Enmax actually opposed to Bill 50?

[sclitheroe]

Can someone explain this to me - is it because Enmax is not a big player in transmission, and wants a piece of the monetary pie? Are they vying to build new local generation or upgrades to existing plants rather than invest in transmission capacity?

When a company comes out so strongly opposed to something like an infrastructure upgrade, with other companies in the industry being strong proponents of the project, I figure there must be a reason other than what they are stating on their website...

[brownie]

I know they are just finishing up a plant in Crossfield and there's 2 more proposed for the area. A small one in the Ogden area and another very large one (1000 megawatts) in the Sheppard area.

[Ashartus]

I think it's because Enmax want to build more local power plants, instead of another company building the plant up north and shipping it down the transmission line. They definitely have some self interest in this.

Personally I'm strongly against Bill 50 purely for it's anti-democratic nature - I don't have a strong opinion on whether the transmission line is necessary, but a bill that lets the government decide what's needed without any sort of consultation is a really bad idea in my opinion.

[Crazy Flamer]

You can learn more about Enmax's position here:

www.enmax.com/bill50

[flamingchina]

Basically:
Enmax is against Bill 50, since they are building newer, higher cost plants near Calgary (Nat Gas)
The others are against it, as they're building lower cost plants up north (Coal, Co-gen) and if there is lots of transmission, they can sell the lower cost power in Calgary.

So if they sell low cost power in Calgary, Enmax can't make any money on their higher cost plants near the city.

The big problem driving Bill 50 is that this is now the 3rd (4th?) hearing on these power lines. It's getting that people are becoming BANANAs.

[ken0042]

The thing I don't get is why we are doing this? At $20B that works out to just over $15K per household.

Take that money and let people put up their own solar and wind power, and you take away the need for those additional power lines. Last time I looked I was going to need $10-15K to go full solar/ wind power.

Never mind the green implications- it just makes more sense from a cost standpoint.

[yads]

Originally Posted by ken0042

The thing I don't get is why we are doing this? At $20B that works out to just over $15K per household.

Take that money and let people put up their own solar and wind power, and you take away the need for those additional power lines. Last time I looked I was going to need $10-15K to go full solar/ wind power.

Never mind the green implications- it just makes more sense from a cost standpoint.

Businesses need energy as well and use a lot of it. Also not everyone is going to want to do this unless you want the government to force everyone to do this.

[mykalberta]

I am with Enmax on this issue.

I dont know why the Ab Govt wouldnt want more NatGas plants to increase demnd/price for a resource they get high royalty rates from. I know they get alot of money from coal but I dont want my power coming from Wabaman Coal power plants.

Also, since Enmax is the City of Calgary run company, I support issues that increase its profit margins, and not those of Epcor/Atco.

[Draug]

My guess is that Epcor/Atco wants these massive transmission lines not to transmit cheap power to our cities, but to continue the transmission line right to the US and sell power there. It is really a huge win for Epcor; they get the AB tax payer to pay for the huge expensive lines and then Epcor reaps the profits of using them.

I am against Bill 50 and the transmission lines. Anytime a government tries to pass something without public consent, in such an anti-democratic manner, it puts me against the issue. Combine that with the propoganda adds you hear on the radio these days which promote the new transmission lines, and warning bells and red flashing lights go off all over for me.

Plus, and this is a guess, wouldnt Natural Gas burning plants be more environmentally responsible than Coal burning plants?

[lucky1]

This is not about all the 'cheaper' power from Epcor/Alta Power, this is all about the stranded power up in the fort mcmurray area. All the SAGD plants (most, anyways) are using combined cycle plants to generate the steam required, the by product is power...they absolutely need the upgraded transmission lines to southern alberta for continued growth.
As far as power reliabilty goes, the smart players build the source near the loads....long transmission lines are bad juju in the generation world, but great news for the distribution world.
Enmax is just commissioning the crossfield plant (a peaker) and is getting ready to sign on the dotted line for the plant in Ogden, on the Calgary Malting site. They also want to build a big plant in Sheppard, but they cant go that one alone. Lets not forget that they also own the Calgary Energy Centre plant out in balzac, the former Calpine plant.
Enmax is doing the right thing, each major metropolis should have its own generation infrastructure, we are getting bent over by the players in Northern Alberta...plain and simple

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Draug

...
I am against Bill 50 and the transmission lines. Anytime a government tries to pass something without public consent, in such an anti-democratic manner, it puts me against the issue. Combine that with the propoganda adds you hear on the radio these days which promote the new transmission lines, and warning bells and red flashing lights go off all over for me.
...

The Herlad had a very biased/pro Bill 50 article last week, it said that in Ontario Quebec, they dont have consultation process like they were having in Alberta, they just label it public good and ram it through, of course they need massive transmission lines there because of Hydro/Nuke and all the Nimbys.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by yads

Businesses need energy as well and use a lot of it.

Right, but at home right now I am using about 0.1-0.2 KW/h; and my solar panels would be generating 10 times that amount of power; putting it into the grid at a time that is peak time. Get 100,000 other households doing the same thing, and you have an extra 100-200 megawatts of power available.

Obviously I don't have the electrical engineering background do design the whole system, but we have only been given one option.

The one thing I know for a fact is that there is a loss of power over distances; so why not build Enmax's power plants locally that would push 90% of the power onto the grid as opposed to the 60-70% we would get after it travels 100's of km?

The reason why places like Manitoba have major transmission lines is that is where the rivers are with hydro dams- up north.

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Right, but at home right now I am using about 0.1-0.2 KW/h; and my solar panels would be generating 10 times that amount of power; putting it into the grid at a time that is peak time. Get 100,000 other households doing the same thing, and you have an extra 100-200 megawatts of power available.

Obviously I don't have the electrical engineering background do design the whole system, but we have only been given one option.

The one thing I know for a fact is that there is a loss of power over distances; so why not build Enmax's power plants locally that would push 90% of the power onto the grid as opposed to the 60-70% we would get after it travels 100's of km?

The reason why places like Manitoba have major transmission lines is that is where the rivers are with hydro dams- up north.

And I think that is why Enmax is opposed to Bill 50. They would like power plants to be built more closely to their final destinations as opposed to having inefficient upgrades done to the grid, where power would have to travel a great distance.

[mykalberta]

According to the Herald article last week the new lines between Edmonton and Calgary are supposed to have less loss than the current ones.