The Leader-PostPublished: Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Re the article: "Clean-coal cuts carbon, power", Leader-Post, March 6.
The clean-coal project is optimistically estimated to cost $1.4 billion for a 100-megawatt generating station, or $14 million per MW of capacity. It will take seven years to build the demonstration project, then (if feasible) it will take another 10 years while a generating plant is being built -- a total of around 20 years before we have new clean-coal generating capacity.
Other than $240 million from the federal government, provincial taxpayers will be on the hook for the remainder of the $1.2 billion by having to guarantee SaskPower's debt and a return on any private monies invested.
This province doesn't have the lowest electrical rates in the country -- 750 kilowatt hours (kwh) per month in Winnipeg costs $50; the same amount of energy would cost $86 in Regina, and other customer classes would reflect the same cost relationship.
SaskPower's recent decision to buy power from investor-owned utilities, build more windmills and rely on gas-fired generation have tended to widen the spread in rates between Manitoba and Saskatchewan. And with the uncertainty as to what direction the corporation plans to take in the next 15 years, the spread will widen -- while on the other hand Manitoba Hydro can fuel that province's economy into the foreseeable future with stable and predictable electric rates.
Rather than directing its attention to coal or uranium, it is time SaskPower directed its attention to providing electricity at the lowest possible cost, having regard to safety and the environment. Saskatchewan (unlike Alberta) has undeveloped hydro options.
While the lowest cost option would be a conventional 300MW coal-fired unit incorporating the latest proven emissions controls costing about $1.5 billion, the better alternative would be to develop two hydro sites upstream from Nipawin. That would give us 500 MW of capacity producing emission- and escalation-free energy at a cost much less than the $3.8 billion estimated for a 300 MW "clean coal" plant. And the first plant could be up and running in less than eight years. Good for the environment and good for the cost of power -- a win-win situation.
John R. McClement
Regina
1 comment:
Why hasn't the option of installing a 4th unit at Coteau Creek been explored?
Most of the civil structures for a 4th unit were built when the Gardiner Dam was built. All that would be required would be modifications to the existing powerhouse to accomodate an additional turbine and generator.
The total amount of energy produced by Coteau Creek would not climb -- but water power is synergistic with wind, and a 4-unit CCPS would improve system stability and balance with increased amounts of wind generation.
Post a Comment