Talk:Electricity sector in Canada

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Old data[edit]

There are real holes in the numbers for the various provinces, and provinces that are missing altogether. I've been trying to find numbers at statscan but its hard to find anything there. If you have recent numbers for electricity generation that are missing here, please add them. If I can get them all I'll make a bar graph that shows relative size of each of the province's generation and the source breakdown for each. TastyCakes 04:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm I'm looking at the articles again and it seems like a jumbled mess. Does anyone know where to find more recent Canada wide data than 2003? I wish I'd put %s in the pie chart as well.. damn.. Anyway, looks like Ontario and New Brunswick needs sorting out.. TastyCakes 00:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rates way out-of-date[edit]

At least for BC, which has had huge increases following massive privatization and spending a billion dollars on Smart Meters. The article claims 8.78 cents/kWh, but the current residential marginal rate is 12.43. Jan Steinman (talk) 06:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing line chart[edit]

In the first figure, the red line seems to represent what the primary data source calls "conventional thermal electric" power. Does this mean fossil-fuel power plants? I was confused by the legend, since it labels the red line as "Thermal" (which could mean many different things -- nuclear, fossil fuel, geothermal, solar thermal, etc.). If it really does refer to fossil fuels, the legend should probably be revised to say "fossil fuels". Ka-Ping Yee (talk) 09:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it would seem to refer to fossil fuels and you're right, it's confusing. TastyCakes (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Data[edit]

Ideally, I'd like to update this article so it contains both the generating capacity and the amount of energy generated each year for each province, along with how much energy they exported and how much they imported (and net). This information can all be found for 2003 in this site but I haven't had the time or inclination to go through and make little tables for each province. Also, that data is now 5 years old and new numbers would be much better... But if anyone wants to incorporate the data that'd be great. TastyCakes (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added the charts of the data. If anyone wants the Excel sheets to change stuff, please contact me. There may be more up to date numbers available, I haven't really looked. I think my next step will be to make a map of Canada with the production of electricity by each province represented by a bar and its consumption represented by a bar. Also, perhaps adding per capita electricity consumption to the tables. TastyCakes (talk) 19:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Steam?!?![edit]

All the energy sources describe the actual thing that holds the energy, not the process that turns the energy into electricity, except "steam" and "internal combustion". Hydro comes from water, nuclear from fission ... where does "steam" energy come from? This seems highly irregular, and not in keeping with energy source listing conventions, such as those on the World energy page. In fact, "steam" sounds rather euphemistic, suggesting nothing about the impact of the energy source. I mean, nuclear power also generates, "steam", and yet it's called "nuclear". What is the actual source of the energy? Lastly, if I may ask, why did the author of this article choose to call an energy source "steam" in the first place? LeoTrottier (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited the article to reflect the actual energy source that produces the steam. LeoTrottier (talk) 18:11, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The term comes from the statscan report here. I also dislike the term, but I don't think it means "coal". I believe they mean the type of generator, which seems to me like it can run on coal or natural gas, but the report doesn't say. I think nuclear plants also generate steam to run turbines so it's a poor choice of term, but labeling it all as coal is probably incorrect. If you can find a better data set, please update. TastyCakes (talk) 17:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See the footnote on p. 13 from the article's source #1, here: [1]. LeoTrottier (talk) 02:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've appended "(mainly coal)" to the instances of "Steam" in the tables. Regardless of the silly bureaucratic reason StatsCan chose to organize things this way (probably because it made their work easier when compiling the report), it seems pretty silly to have a heterogeneous listing of energy sources and conversion methods. From the information-consumer's standpoint, the salient thing is not whether internal combustion or steam is used to produce electricity so much as it's the place where the energy comes from to begin with. LeoTrottier (talk) 03:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm that may be the case in some provinces, but the other data source for Alberta (just below it) gives it as coal 48.8%, gas 38.4%, which when combined come close to the statscan source for steam at 81.1%. The difference perhaps made up by gas being used in combustion turbines... Perhaps it should be Steam (coal and gas)? Incidentally, do combustion turbines in this case burn gas? I don't imagine they're burning gasoline or fuel oil like planes and tanks... TastyCakes (talk) 03:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point. If "mainly" means "usually in the majority", then Alberta is still mainly coal, no? It's strange that there would be these numerical discrepancies -- perhaps from different methods/years? I think it's fair to say that when people look up information on electricity generation in Canada they are interested in figuring out where the energy is coming from. In particular, they are interested in knowing the degree to which their energy comes from fossil fuels, what kinds of fossil fuels, or if they come from renewables (usually). Wouldn't you agree? LeoTrottier (talk) 04:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree entirely and wish Statscan had given the data like that. I think "mainly" usually constitutes a significant majority, especially if there's only 2. By the other numbers, 43% of the two combined is gas, and 57% doesn't seem like "mainly" to me. But what we really need are better numbers to see if Alberta's "steam" category does have a significant gas portion (along with the other provinces, if possible). Then we could put in each province's steam box what is mainly used to generate the steam. TastyCakes (talk) 18:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Would you also agree that it's virtually useless to say that electricity comes from "steam" (unless you're administering and maintaining power plants) ... ? I suppose I just feel that the article should emphasize the place where the energy is stored and comes from, not the conversion method, regardless of how the reports from the Canadian gov't are organized. I mean, it's like saying a gasoline-dependent car is powered by pressurized air (which is true, because this is what pushes the pistons). I found some more sources that might be helpful: [2], [3], [4] LeoTrottier (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No I would not say it's useless. It's not ideal but it's better than the current alternative (incomplete data). Actually it's like saying a car is fueled by a combustion engine, rather than gasoline. Could the car run on diesel or natural gas? Yes, and that's why it's not a perfect description, but still not useless. Sorry, I haven't had time to go through all your links yet... TastyCakes (talk) 15:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize -- I don't think it's useless (but then, I didn't say it was ... :) ). Everyone here is contributing their time for free (or so I presume) so some work done is better than none. Anyway, I'll look for more sources later. LeoTrottier (talk) 23:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No offense taken TastyCakes (talk) 16:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm I like the IEA link for Canada overall except it doesn't show generating capacity, do you think that data is elsewhere on the site? Maybe we can find it for 2005 from other sources. TastyCakes (talk) 05:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures[edit]

There are lots of pictures of the renewable and low-environmental-impact energy sources, but no pictures of coal or "thermal" power generation. Perhaps this might be changed to better reflect the energy sources used in Canada? LeoTrottier (talk) 18:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been putting in pictures of electricity generating sites that I know are in a certain province. I haven't found any such pictures of thermal plants, but if you do please add them. The tables line up better with a picture, I think. TastyCakes (talk) 17:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Major update[edit]

I plan to do a complete rewrite of this article. I've already started by updating the capacity and generation for all provinces and writing a new lede. In the coming hours and days, I also plan to add :

  1. an historical perspective on electricity in Canada (inspired by what I wrote in Énergie au Canada on the French Wikipedia;
  2. a section on the provincial nature of the electricity business and the regulatory framework (public utilities board, NEB, NERC and cross-border standards);
  3. Revamp the whole generation section:
    1. sub-sections on nuclear, hydro, fossil and wind;
    2. add a short description of generation mixes for all provinces and;
  4. a section on climate change and the electricity business;
  5. a description of the Canadian electrical grid.
  6. a section on cross-border electricity trade

Feel free to join in. Bouchecl (talk) 18:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That'd be great, the data is getting very out of date and it was always kind of hard to understand... TastyCakes (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm basically done for the weekend. Feel free to jump in and complete the missing sections. I'll be back early next week. Cheers! Bouchecl (talk) 23:52, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History of electricity sector in Canada[edit]

I suggest a new article: History of electricity sector in Canada since

  • the article says: Electricity has played a significant role in the economic and political life of the country since the late 19th century
  • there is enough material for a new article, and
  • after division the remaining article can consentrate better in the present status. Watti Renew (talk) 18:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moving down a section (Electricity sector in Canada#Electricity pro person and by power source)[edit]

This section was placed (a little arbitrarily) between Organization and Generation, but deals with generation. Moreover, the Organization section illustrates the fact that there is no single Canadian electric grid but provincial grids, so the numbers in the first three tables of the Generation section are essential to understand how it works. That's basically why I moved the section down by a few paragraphs. EDIT: Oh, and a table that classifies hydropower as Other RE is of dubious use in an article about electricity in Canada (59% hydro!) Bouchecl (talk) 03:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Politicized tone of paragraph in Ontario section[edit]

The completion of the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station in 1993, "at a cost several times the original estimates", caused huge rate increases: Actual annual percentage increases would be more specific than "huge", which is too general a descriptor, and maybe a bit hyperbolic. Does "at a cost several times the original estimates" mean in real or nominal dollars? (i.e. was the increase mostly due to general inflation from the time of the original estimates to completion, a period of many years? Was it really Darlington that caused the rate increases, or was it perhaps insufficient rate increases in prior years to provide for future system maintenance and expansion?Tetsuo (talk) 02:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Carbon capture projects[edit]

The section of this article on "Climate change" mentions two carbon capture projects: one at Keephills 3 in Alberta, the other at Boundary Dam in Saskatchewan. Apparently the first project has been cancelled and the other has been scaled back. There are probably other CCS projects that should be mentioned here instead. This page on the Government of Alberta website mentions two other projects with provincial funding but I am unclear on their current status. --Jd4v15 (talk) 20:48, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Electricity_sector_in_Canada&oldid=1196690696"