Ontario to spend $7-billion on sweeping climate change plan
Newsbot @ Mon May 16, 2016 10:26 am
Title: Ontario to spend $7-billion on sweeping climate change plan
Category: Environmental
Posted By: N_Fiddledog
Date: 2016-05-16 10:05:02
Canadian
N_Fiddledog @ Mon May 16, 2016 10:26 am
All this to do what, I wonder?
How much colder is Kathy hoping she can make an Ontario winter?
OnTheIce @ Mon May 16, 2016 10:36 am
$1:
New building code rules that will require all homes and small buildings built in 2030 or later to be heated without using fossil fuels, such as natural gas
What a laughable idea.
BartSimpson @ Mon May 16, 2016 10:42 am
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
All this to do what, I wonder?
How much colder is Kathy hoping she can make an Ontario winter?
How much colder is Kathy hoping she can make an Ontario winter?
That's not the thing here. The thing here is spending $7 billion and then getting out of office before the results of the spending are supposed to be observed.
Summary: Someone figured out how to fleece Ontario taxpayers of $7 billion.
martin14 @ Mon May 16, 2016 10:43 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
$1:
New building code rules that will require all homes and small buildings built in 2030 or later to be heated without using fossil fuels, such as natural gas
What a laughable idea.
Only electric heat, now at $1000 and soon to be $2000 a month.
Unsound @ Mon May 16, 2016 10:50 am
So... after the Ft. Mac fire refugees are back on their feet do we need to start preparing for the Ontario utility bill refugees?
peck420 @ Mon May 16, 2016 10:55 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
What a laughable idea.
Not laughable at all.
We can currently build homes that can be heated with the equivalent of a toaster.
Codes are so far behind building technology that there is currently superior products that we can't even use.
BartSimpson @ Mon May 16, 2016 11:18 am
peck420 peck420:
We can currently build homes that can be heated with the equivalent of a toaster.
They're wheelchair accessible, too!
Thanos @ Mon May 16, 2016 11:21 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
$1:
New building code rules that will require all homes and small buildings built in 2030 or later to be heated without using fossil fuels, such as natural gas
What a laughable idea.
They seem insane enough to spend another $7 billion then to set up some kind of police force to barge into homes to enforce compliance. And to make sure the furnace is attached to a windmill, or to a gerbil running on an exercise wheel, or whatever the fuck else it is they'll think up by then.
Lemmy @ Mon May 16, 2016 11:26 am
Thanos Thanos:
They seem insane enough to spend another $7 billion then to set up some kind of police force to barge into homes to enforce compliance.
Yeah, that'll probably be how it'll happen.
Thanos Thanos:
And to make sure the furnace is attached to a windmill, or to a gerbil running on an exercise wheel, or whatever the fuck else it is they'll think up by then.
YES! It's the "whatever the fuck else they'll think up by then" that's the key. Human ingenuity used to be something we liked to bet on. Not so much anymore, I guess.
Thanos @ Mon May 16, 2016 11:34 am
You're the ones that are going to be living in a jurisdiction where someday the home electrical and heating costs are going to be more than what a monthly mortgage payment is. Tell me how smart and ingenious it all turns out to be when the combination of utility costs and mortgage are going to price anyone under the age of 60 from being able to own their own house. You guys couldn't have done a better job at all of murdering both the golden goose and the average citizen's dream.
N_Fiddledog @ Mon May 16, 2016 11:38 am
An opinion from WUWT.
$1:
If I lived in Ontario, I would be deeply concerned about this plan.
Electric home heating is fine, until the electricity fails. When my family lived in Britain, our 6Kw coal burner was indispensable, especially when power lines were damaged by blizzards.
Geothermal systems, heat pumps which take advantage of the relatively constant ground temperature, are expensive, and require electric power to operate.
As for electric cars, a petroleum or diesel car can keep the occupants warm and safe for many hours, if the car is trapped in heavy snow. An electric car, with its much lower energy density, and the susceptibility of batteries to cold, not so much
Electric home heating is fine, until the electricity fails. When my family lived in Britain, our 6Kw coal burner was indispensable, especially when power lines were damaged by blizzards.
Geothermal systems, heat pumps which take advantage of the relatively constant ground temperature, are expensive, and require electric power to operate.
As for electric cars, a petroleum or diesel car can keep the occupants warm and safe for many hours, if the car is trapped in heavy snow. An electric car, with its much lower energy density, and the susceptibility of batteries to cold, not so much
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/16/ ... g-by-2030/
N_Fiddledog @ Mon May 16, 2016 11:41 am
Come to think of it...I don't hear a lot about that one, but how good are electric cars in a Canadian winter, anyway.
Just curious, if anybody has personal experience.
uwish @ Mon May 16, 2016 11:44 am
This is the dangers of junk science, with crooked governing bodies that will now make policy based on faulty and fraudulent information.
Freakinoldguy @ Mon May 16, 2016 11:48 am
WTF is another 7 billion when you're the most indebted sub sovereign borrower in the world and who gives a shit if your citizens freeze in the dark because of your idiotic failed green energy schemes. It's all about the new "Great Leap Forward".
Hell, even England the land of the dancing gnomes has figured out that wind farms are ineffective but not Ontario, they're still looking for that magic bullet to solve the worlds problems by all by themselves.
$1:
Britain buckles down to real energy. The UK will change out an established wind farm for a new nuclear power plant. This rational move will boost an anemic average of 1.3 MW of zero emissions wind generated power to a robust average of 1300 GW of zero emissions nuclear power. The manufacturer of wind turbines will be cutting jobs, blaming the government for failing to support the sector.
Britain has learned the hard way that their headlong green rush into medieval technology has been wasteful and foolish. They spent time and money trying to force a technology to do what it simply can't do. Despite what Boone Pickens says, wind's optimum use is only as backup and it can't supply more than twenty percent of required loads. Pickens is a subsidy hunter, promising a 25% return on a 4,000 MW windmill farm in Texas, based entirely on federal tax credits. Have you ever seen how much land wind power requires? Pickens' project will need 1,200 square miles. But, none in his backyard, please. He thinks the wind towers are too ugly to be on his large ranch.
Britain has learned the hard way that their headlong green rush into medieval technology has been wasteful and foolish. They spent time and money trying to force a technology to do what it simply can't do. Despite what Boone Pickens says, wind's optimum use is only as backup and it can't supply more than twenty percent of required loads. Pickens is a subsidy hunter, promising a 25% return on a 4,000 MW windmill farm in Texas, based entirely on federal tax credits. Have you ever seen how much land wind power requires? Pickens' project will need 1,200 square miles. But, none in his backyard, please. He thinks the wind towers are too ugly to be on his large ranch.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2009/05/flo ... effective/