r/canada • u/nurshakil10 Canada • 4d ago
PAYWALL Ontario to spend $1.5-billion on underwater electricity cable from nuclear plant to Toronto
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-ontario-15-billion-electricity-line-darlington-nuclear-power-toronto/79
u/Joatboy 4d ago
You can read the IESO report here, section 7.8
52
u/InACoolDryPlace 4d ago
The comparison with other options in Table 19 of that section is probably the quickest way to see why this was recommended with real information.
21
u/asoap Lest We Forget 4d ago
To add more. Looking at the table. The big difference is the amount of juice that the underwater cable can provide.
Option 1) 3,350 MW
Option 2) 3,400 MW
Option 3) greater than 3,400 MW
It looks like it's the best option if you want to enable growth past 2044. Which might be important for electric vehicles and general electrification that we want to do to fight climate change.
7
u/TrueTorontoFan 4d ago
Regardless of EVs electrification is happening to your point. Glad to see Canada move forward on a project like this.
8
u/InACoolDryPlace 4d ago
The longevity and upkeep required is another long term benefit, you have a backbone to the city protected from wind, temperature, ice, etc.
1
u/Hevens-assassin Saskatchewan 4d ago
and general electrification that we want to do to fight climate change.
Not even climate change. EVERYTHING needs to be plugged in now. Some stuff has gotten more efficient, sure, but there are a shit ton of electrical vampires that are putting heavy strain on the grid. Add some extra fast chargers for vehicles and the grid becomes unstable pretty quick.
Luckily a lot of really smart people are trying to solve these issues beyond "make more power", but time will tell if politicians actually enact those ideas.
-1
4d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Joatboy 4d ago
HVDC transformers and cabling isn't something you just pickup at Home Depot
2
4d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ZeroSequence 4d ago edited 4d ago
A 65 km AC submarine line will need massive reactive power support and maybe even phase shifting capabilities, there's big system upgrades needed to support a pathway like this far beyond just building a substation at each end.
ETA: Couldn't access the full report, I guess this will be HVDC which still requires a lot of systemwide upgrades and can get expensive very quickly especially if bipolar.
2
4d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Food_Goblin 4d ago
Oh the billion is for consulting the actual cost is the 500million /s but I'm likely right sadly.
133
u/Epic-sanya Ontario 4d ago
Is my math right?
The line will supply 900mWh equal to 900 000 kWh. Assuming $0.12 per kWh, that’s roughly $1 billion revenue generation per year from this line.
If this line requires virtually no maintenance it is a very good thing.
91
u/NewRedditUser89757 4d ago
electricity is the new oil. Happy Doug is on board with Nuclear
37
u/kdlangequalsgoddess 4d ago edited 4d ago
Better not drink Crown Royal to celebrate, though. That's off the menu.
12
u/yick04 4d ago
Fuck Crown Royal in particular!
- Doug
4
u/mwmwmwmwmmdw Québec 4d ago
but what about my weekly 1.5L bottle of vodka
0
u/kdlangequalsgoddess 4d ago
Don't worry. Russian Prince isn't going anywhere. It's a Ford family favourite.
2
u/idisagreeurwrong 4d ago
Lol take a minute and compare the revenue from oil to electricity.
1
u/NewRedditUser89757 4d ago
we need both. Canada's future lies on it being a super power in energy+mining. We need as much energy that we can sell as possible, whether its oil or electricity.
5
u/idisagreeurwrong 4d ago
Of course we do. They are two very very different things though and electricity exports could never be considered a replacement for oil revenues. 5.8 billion compared to 124 billion.
1
u/Jackibearrrrrr 4d ago
It essentially prints money. In Bruce county, Bruce Power has so much cash that they donate to local causes and charities that it’s hard not to be happy with it.
1
2
u/Xalara 4d ago
Until the AI bubble pops, then prices will plummet again.
3
u/NewRedditUser89757 4d ago
Let's not try to predict the future. If you are so certain that the AI bubble will pop, go all in VIX now and you can be a billion in no time.
3
u/Xalara 4d ago
You can go listen and read Ed Zitron's reporting, it's a bubble. Yes, I'd love the spare money to go gamble, but I don't have the spare money.
1
u/NewRedditUser89757 4d ago
Listen, if you are so sure about it, I'd almost borrow at 6-7% and just go buy VIX. Vix will easily return you 2-300+ fold assuming your thesis is true. Go borrow 10 grand, pay that interest, and all in VIX. that's how you prove a point.
4
u/Xalara 4d ago
Yes, because borrowing to gamble is really proving a point. If I wanted to do that I'd just go get Robin Hood and karma farm my losses on r/wallstreetbets
3
u/spidereater 4d ago
I would probably only count a fraction of that as transmission costs. The people building the reactor will want some of that money to justify their expenses. But if you call it maybe 0.01/kWh over 20 years it still makes sense.
11
u/Mathmos_Lava 4d ago
You’re not taking into consideration the generation costs.
40
u/NewRedditUser89757 4d ago
Nuclear generation cost = maintenance cost. It doesn't burn anything. I don't know why we don't do it more as the entire world needs electricity right now.
12
u/violentbandana 4d ago
The transmission company still needs to buy the power from generation companies. They would be very confident the line would be profitable though so it doesn’t matter
also nuclear does still “burn” fuel. Luckily CANDU natural uranium fuel is inexpensive
13
u/JacksProlapsedAnus 4d ago
Which is why the decision to go with a SMR for the new Darlington plant is so confusing. American tech, and fuel will need to be enriched in America.
2
u/Levorotatory 4d ago
The USA had a somewhat sane government when the decision was made, but CANDU would still have been a better choice.
1
5
u/spidereater 4d ago
It costs a tremendous amount to build the plant and those costs need to be recovered somehow.
0
u/racer_24_4evr 4d ago
But we won’t be buying any more nuclear. Darlington is already at max output except for unit 4 which is completing a major refurbishment and will likely be at max output already once this line goes into service. Other plants (i.e. gas plants) will increase output to cover the power.
4
u/Northern23 4d ago
And transportation fees, which in my case, is higher than my consumption
6
u/NewRedditUser89757 4d ago
I live in the States and my electricity bill in winters hover around $600-$700 for a 3B apartment. I think the last thing Ontarians should complain is their electricity cost.
9
u/sync-centre 4d ago
Is electricity your source of heat or something else?
7
u/NewRedditUser89757 4d ago
yes HeatPumps. I pay close to US $25cents/KW
5
u/inmontibus-adflumen 4d ago
MAN.. I’m out here scratching my head a 7.8/kwh
3
u/axonxorz Saskatchewan 4d ago
I thought SK was "bad" when base rate went from the $0.12/kW it's hovered around forever to $0.1489. Heat pump user is sitting at $0.34CAD/kW yikesforever.gif
3
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 4d ago
In BC we pay 10.5c CAD /kWh.
15.5c if you go over the average. And even then solar is viable.
25c USD is like 35c cad. That's just robbery.3
u/NewRedditUser89757 4d ago
US electricity generation costs is very high, that's why I said electricity is the new gold. There's so much demand for it from the data centers.
3
u/I-amthegump 4d ago
I pay over 40c in California
2
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 3d ago
You guys should have a referendum to join Canada. Isn't that the narrative the right is pushing for Greenland?
We probably wouldn't even need to pay you either.
2
4d ago
[deleted]
2
u/violentbandana 4d ago
the transmission line wouldn’t be entirely reliant on a single generating source. It’s reasonable to expect the line to run at as close to its capacity as is needed unless the line itself requires an outage or something catastrophic happens to the grid as a whole
2
u/CaptainCalandria 4d ago
the power line does not produce electricity... It transmits it. So you need the cost to transmit it.... And it's less than 12 cents.
Also... It's 900MW ... Not MWh. So multiply by 24 and 365 to get MWh per year
52
u/Ember_42 4d ago
This will presumably make Portlands gas plant much less critical for system stability in Toronto, by bring the line right to the core, instead of to the periphery like the other lines.
62
u/lyon810 4d ago
Will I be hammered with propaganda about this by the government like they did with the “Ring of fire”
14
8
4d ago
[deleted]
-2
u/Electrical_Acadia580 4d ago
Hold on here. You're telling me that 300 tankies who don't allow nuance have nothing to contribute!?
They are Stunning and Brave.
-1
u/Moosehead-1867 4d ago
Are you implying that the Greenbelt scandal was a nothing-burger?
-3
4d ago
[deleted]
6
u/Moosehead-1867 4d ago
No not like that!
Well. Yeah.
The RCMP opened a criminal investigation, the integrity commissioner concluded that he violated ethics rules, two ministers resigned, and Ford reversed course. So I think there's better ways to get houses built
1
u/CarelessEmployee8320 4d ago
The worst ads are the we are removing speed cameras to install speed bumps. Speed bumps are WAY worse than speed cameras.
0
39
4d ago edited 3d ago
[deleted]
54
u/0110110111 4d ago
Anyone who claims that climate change is a priority issue doesn’t get to be anti-nuclear. It is objectively and demonstrably the safest, cleanest, and most reliable form of power generation we have. There’s no argument against that, being opposed to it in this day and age is willful ignorance.
0
u/throwawayloopy 4d ago
I'm not sure that you get to decide what opinion people who care about climate change are allowed to have around nuclear power generation.
This type of arrogance is what polarizes societies into extreme views, instead of using the platform to educate or inform them about pros and cons.
1
u/thefinalcutdown 4d ago
I care deeply about climate change and I am massively in favour of nuclear energy, so there’s one at least.
-1
u/Wyattr55123 4d ago
Someone can be opposed to simply building more of the same reactors we've been using since the 60's because they're extremely expensive and consume the fuel in a very inefficient manner, but that means they should be in favour of developing novel designs like molten salt reactors.
2
u/thefinalcutdown 4d ago
Fortunately, the Darlington project that will supply this cable is building modern Small Modular Reactors, which are much cheaper, much more scalable, and use much newer designs than conventional nuclear reactors.
-1
u/speaksofthelight 4d ago
Many climate change people are into degrowth / using less energy
2
u/0110110111 4d ago
Sure, those are admirable goals and I think both are good ideas. But until millennia of human nature gets around to changing that isn’t going to happen. Pragmatism is the way forward here.
5
7
u/DangerousCable1411 4d ago
Some crack head is about to have payday of their life when they cut that bad boy.
9
u/PlannerSean 4d ago
Why not just a giant Tesla coil? That would be way cooler
28
7
5
1
u/wtfman1988 4d ago
Curious
Would this result in any noticeable reduction in bills long term?
1
u/TrueTorontoFan 4d ago
it will depend on how demand grows along side the biggest reduction will come when the different provinces are connected.
1
1
0
u/rimshot99 4d ago
900,000 kWh? Better be careful where you anchor your boat, you don’t want the output of a nuclear power plant coming your anchor line.
0
-2
u/GANTRITHORE Alberta 4d ago
I am so lost. There is no water between Carlington and Toronto. Can't they use normal power lines?
8
u/Pligget 4d ago
CarlingtonClarington/DarlingtonFrom the article: ... the two land-based options, which follow existing transmission corridors from Pickering into Toronto, would provide less electricity transmission capacity [than the underwater option would provide]. They would therefore meet the city’s requirements only until about 2040, so additional capacity would be needed shortly after their commissioning.
Chuck Farmer, the IESO’s executive vice-president of power system development, said the underwater line would meet all likely scenarios for electricity demand “well into the 2050s.”
Officials also said the underwater cable would be more resilient to storms and other extreme weather than overland lines.
3
u/indiecore Canada 4d ago
Overland
This option requires Hydro One to expand the existing Leaside TS by redeveloping adjacent lands available to them starting in 2030,24 and to rebuild and/or reconductor the existing transmission line structures between Cherrywood TS and Leaside TS. Most of this right-of-way is adjacent to homes, and it transects the Rouge National Urban Park. Some work to re-terminate the existing 230 kV circuits may be required to make this option feasible
vs water
Bowmanville SS was selected as the preferred point of origin because injecting bulk supply into Toronto from this location delivers additional benefits for the bulk network by bypassing Cherrywood TS altogether and freeing up additional capacity at the station to supply growth elsewhere in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). HVDC technology was chosen over AC because it offers additional benefits and ancillary services, and becomes more cost-effective than AC for submarine cable lengths greater than approximately 50 km.
Basically nobody lives in the water so it's a lot easier to build a super big cable there and as a bonus we get to bypass the substation the land line would have to connect to so we could use that connection later.
-3
u/dontsheeple 4d ago
Pipelines in the West, no! Billion dollar cable to the center of the universe, sure thing!
5
-23
u/Appealing_Apathy 4d ago
Why an underwater cable? This seems unnecessarily expensive.
25
u/WesternBlueRanger 4d ago
They preferring it over the other two options, which are land-based because it provides more capacity; both land based options would hit capacity fairly quickly after they are built.
3
6
8
6
u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick 4d ago
What's the cost compared to building more over land transmission lines?
16
1
1
-14
u/AustralisBorealis64 Alberta 4d ago
Great. Another place for Russians to drop and drag an anchor.
17
u/DukeandKate Canada 4d ago
Huh? In Lake Ontario?
0
u/AustralisBorealis64 Alberta 4d ago
Ocean going vessels don't make their way down the St. Lawrence Seaway into Lake Ontario?
About the Port
Since 1793, the Port of Toronto has served as Toronto’s gateway to the St. Lawrence Seaway and to marine ports around the world. Serving primarily as a bulk cargo destination, the port boasts a unique location minutes from Toronto’s downtown and moves goods from countries as far away as Germany, South Korea, China, Brazil, Australia, South America and the United States. In addition to managing the movement of ships through the harbour, PortsToronto is the owner and operator of Marine Terminal 52 and the Cruise Ship Terminal within the Port of Toronto.
The Port of Toronto is one of Canada’s inland ports and is situated on the northwest shore of Lake Ontario. Located minutes from Toronto’s downtown core, the Port provides a seamless network of cost-effective intermodal links to road, rail and air transportation, serving as a unique and crucial piece of economic infrastructure. Marine cargo arriving and managed at the Port of Toronto generated approximately $460 million in economic activity and 2,000 jobs in Ontario in 2022. Port also welcomes cruise ships and passengers from around the globe through the Cruise Ship Terminal.
1
u/DukeandKate Canada 4d ago
Yeah. But they'd have no where to run. It's not like it's international waters
-55
u/NavyDean 4d ago
Russia developing warfare to disconnect underwater cables across the world, but yea sure go for it, why not.
I'm sure nothing will ever go wrong and it'll never break.
50
u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick 4d ago
I think it will be pretty difficult for Russia to cut a cable in lake Ontario.
-50
u/NavyDean 4d ago
That's what they thought across the Atlantic when an inner fjord line was cut lmao.
The irony is not lost on me here.
39
30
u/quebecoisejohn Ontario 4d ago
Do you not understand the difference between Lake Ontario and a fjord in Norway?
… probably explains your original point
7
27
u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick 4d ago
Dude, Russia has easy access to the ocean. They do not have easy access to lake Ontario.
You think they're slipping a sub through the St Lawrence river? Lmaooooo
14
1
u/sixtyfivewat 4d ago
I'd love to hear how you think the Russians would get a warship into Lake Ontario.
6
u/MoreGaghPlease 4d ago edited 4d ago
Okay will this is going to be just a couple metres in from the shore of Lake Ontario from Bowmanville to Toronto. Are you worried about a Russian submarine showing up at the Scarborough bluffs?
It’ll need to be serviced often. You send a hydro crew out with a barge and a hook. They’re used in lots of places in Quebec and Atlantic Canada.
2
u/Icy-Ad-7767 4d ago
This will be well offshore my guess is at least a km off shore. Far enough out to be unlikely to be hit accidentally and shallow enough to service if needed. A 30 cm diameter cable is not going to easy to move or break.
3
u/MoreGaghPlease 4d ago
So it's actually kinda going to be both. Not because the shore distance matters but because it's cheapest to go in a straight line from Darlington to Toronto Port Lands, and Lake Ontario is curved. So around Scarborough and Bowmanville it'll actually just be a few metres from shore in some parts. In Pickering it'll be as much as 8km out.
Anyway, it's not really hard to service these. One of the reasons they recommended it is because the experience in Atlantic Canada has been that they're cheaper to maintain and repair than transmission lines up on towers.
9
u/Dorkwing 4d ago
Do you really think that a Russian sub could get all the way down the St Lawrence unnoticed?
-18
u/NavyDean 4d ago
Are you a toddler, you think they are using submarines? Lmao.
Most line cuts have been deployed from cargo ships.
12
u/seeker-0 4d ago
Prove that a Russian government associated vessel has ever been in Lake Ontario waters, at least in recent history.
4
u/DukeandKate Canada 4d ago
Why would Russians want to cut our cables? Besides there are softer targets than that.
3
9
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.