tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post6562036412849505643..comments2023-10-25T07:29:40.789-02:30Comments on UNCLE GNARLEY: Muskrat Falls: NO POWER TO EXPORT (Part 1)Des Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02566013585647491614noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post-5901474755201411862012-07-17T15:57:07.805-02:302012-07-17T15:57:07.805-02:30With MF we are betting the shop on whether the res...With MF we are betting the shop on whether the residential demand goes up one percent per year. An older population and higher prices can easily make the demand shrink one percent. And efficient heating can actually drive the demand on the grid down 2 or 3 percent per year.Nalcor is ignoring this, at their peril. WAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post-55903545078968637952012-07-16T17:40:35.292-02:302012-07-16T17:40:35.292-02:30Uncle Gnarley
Again another very good dissertatio...Uncle Gnarley<br /><br />Again another very good dissertation, with some valid points for further clarification by Nalcor. <br /><br />Of interest is Table 32 of Volume II of the MHI report which indicates that within the Infeed option there is 5900 GWhr of Energy added to the system in 2017 when the Labrador Link comes online. I can only deduce that this is 1400 GWhr of firm energy remaining from the Upper Churchill RECALL arrangement, combined with the 4500 GWhr of firm energy from the Muskrat Falls facility. For clarity the 4900 GWhr is the average annual production. <br /><br />Therefore the “gaps” you have identified may be met by the RECALL power from the Upper Churchill. <br /><br />From the term sheet Emera get 1 TWhr of energy annually for 35 years in exchange for a 1.2 Billion investment in the Maritime Link. According to my back of the envelop calculation this will cost Nova Scotian’s ~8-10 cents for kwhr of energy delivered to their grid. Even when considering Natural Gas, or Hydro Quebec purchases this is a reasonable deal. Compare this to the 23 cents that NL rate payers will pay (RFI – KPL – 27) over the life of project for MF energy.<br /><br />What is not clear from anything I have reviewed is what is the real benefit of the Martime link in the current environment? <br /><br />1) With the potential in Labrador mining (alderon 100- to 120 MW alone) there will be minimal energy left for export.<br /><br />2)The NL ratepayer will take the risk on cost over-runs on the Maritime Link. Why increase our risk profile, if the potential upside is minimal?<br /> <br />3) It is unclear if the Emera deal will actually increase the cost to the Newfoundland ratepayer. There is certainly the loss revenue associated with the RECALL power being given to Emera. This is loss to the government coffers which was not included in the CPW analysis presented to the PUB. However within the same Table 32 there is additional CT generation added to the mix later in the development scheme. There is also fuel spent in these generators. These generators are there for the “peak” energy demands when as you have pointed out MF cannot meet the combined demand. Are we buring fuel later in the project life to only meet the Emera committment? Will this be worse with Alderon? Will this cost be passed on to the NL rate payer. <br /><br />4) Considering a reasonable growth in Labrador mining will we actually be able to decommission Holyrood considering our 167 MW committment to Nova Scotia. <br /> <br />Simply, I would like to know if I will have to pay more or less on my energy bill because of the the Maritime Link. <br /><br />Now that is one to ponder over your next “wee dram”. <br /><br />You are correct. Someone needs to ask these questions soon. But more importantly we need answers and not more rhetoric. <br /><br />I look forward to Part IIIAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post-60092905198927044262012-07-16T13:51:17.451-02:302012-07-16T13:51:17.451-02:30Uncle Gnarley, there is one legal recource not tri...Uncle Gnarley, there is one legal recource not tried. The Upper Churchill proceeded on aboriginal land without their consent. If the Innu Nation took Quebec Hydro and Nfld to court, they could very well be successful.This may require the New Dawn deal to be cancelled, if this is possible if MF is not sanctioned.There was never a treaty with the Innu to turn over their lands to the crown. I would like to see the result of an Innu claim in court. w. adamsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com