Ontario nuclear update - The old girl won't quit

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
58,088
Location
Ontario, Canada
As most who have been following my ramblings on this subject are aware, Pickering, our oldest plant, is destined to be retired starting in 2025 unless the course plotted is changed and the B units are refurbished.

This has led to what I might describe as some "acting out" at the plant. Not in a bad way, these are accolades for the old girl. In 2019, she produced 23.6TWh, a site record and 17% of Ontario's electricity. This weekend Unit 5 hit 560MW. It is rated for 516. It received an HP turbine replacement about a year ago, was a spare they had onsite. They threw it in and output has been bouncing between 535 and 540 since with a run up in the 550's early-on.
Screen Shot 2021-02-15 at 11.09.32 AM.png


Today, Unit 6 decided to join that party and is running in the 530's. With Unit 7 at 522, this means that all the B units that are online (8 is offline for maintenance) are producing well above nameplate (they've backed off on the run-up of Unit 5):
Screen Shot 2021-02-15 at 11.07.42 AM.png


As a nuke nut, this is frustrating, as it shows that if the B units were indeed refurbished, as was originally planned before Ontario's disastrous embarkment into the wind and solar subsidy sideshow, that output could be increased significantly. Given turbine and generator replacements (Unit 5 is on its original generator) north of 560 is easily doable. This is in-line with what's transpiring at Bruce with their refurbishment + uprates.

I don't know what the mindset is at the plant with these latest runs. To show the government that the old girl still has it? That's what I like to think is the case. Pickering is an essential component of Ontario's global leadership on low emissions generation, if enough attention were drawn to that fact I firmly believe that refurbishment would be reconsidered.
 
renewable is marginal at best, not totally bad, but simply marginal. same with electric vehicles, which are a feel-good secondary mode of transport for persons with both surplus income and time. better insulation, passive designs (white roofing, south facing windows, shade), daily drivers that aren’t 18mpg monster trucks, high efficiency electric power transmission lines...all will serve us better.
 
renewable is marginal at best, not totally bad, but simply marginal. same with electric vehicles, which are a feel-good secondary mode of transport for persons with both surplus income and time. better insulation, passive designs (white roofing, south facing windows, shade), daily drivers that aren’t 18mpg monster trucks, high efficiency electric power transmission lines...all will serve us better.

In Ontario, wind produces out of phase with demand. It was an experiment we never should have made. It was at 4% CF yesterday, has crept up a bit today. Our 5,000MW wind fleet was producing ~1/3rd of the output of Pickering Unit 5 yesterday:
Screen Shot 2021-02-14 at 5.07.51 PM.jpg
 
I cant believe nuclear power has been kicked to the curb in favor of crap lithium storage facilities. You want clean energy, electric cars and all the rest get the nuclear plants up and going. JM2C


https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/renewable/the-environmental-impact-of-lithium-batteries/
 
Wind plus solar power is not a complete solution. There needs to be transmission, storage and nuclear fusion. Now.
Fossil fuels are the wrong answer. Greenhous gasses will kill us. Innovation based on science is the answer.
I wonder how many saw Bill Gates on 60 Minutes last night? It is not just vehicles.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
there is a fundamental divide between those who believe in bill gates, and those who dont. i’ve dealt with him personally. count me among the latter. cheers.
 
Wind plus solar power is not a complete solution. There needs to be transmission, storage and nuclear fusion. Now.
Fossil fuels are the wrong answer. Greenhous gasses will kill us. Innovation based on science is the answer.
I wonder how many saw Bill Gates on 60 Minutes last night? It is not just vehicles.
Bill Gates

Fission works just fine, we don't need the solution that's always 30 years away (fusion) when dealing with a short timeline. A US nuke plant refuels once every 18-24 months and is planned for the periods of lowest demand, so unlike gas, it doesn't have a reliance on JIT infrastructure to remain operational.
 
Fission works just fine, we don't need the solution that's always 30 years away (fusion) when dealing with a short timeline. A US nuke plant refuels once every 18-24 months and is planned for the periods of lowest demand, so unlike gas, it doesn't have a reliance on JIT infrastructure to remain operational.
I believe in innvoation. The solutions are out there, we just have to make it a priority. That's Gates' point. To think big and make it a priority.
 
Wind plus solar power is not a complete solution. There needs to be transmission, storage and nuclear fusion. Now.
Fossil fuels are the wrong answer. Greenhous gasses will kill us. Innovation based on science is the answer.
I wonder how many saw Bill Gates on 60 Minutes last night? It is not just vehicles.
Let's try to keep this thread apolitical. GCC, AGW, and similar posts/topics will be removed.

My personal opinion is we need to use energy sources that are currently available and practical, while continuing research on new technologies.

We cannot use technologies that have not been fully developed nor those that are not currently available.

As young, bright-eyed physicist early in my career, I had my sights set on Nuclear Fusion research but the theoretical constructs were not fully developed, nor had the engineering hurdles been addressed. When studying the actual physics and engineering of such an undertaking, one's thinking quickly switches from fantasy to reality.

So I went into the subfield of Solar Energy Thermal processes. But for folks in Iowa and Minn. and other northern states, the energy supply was not there when the demand was critical, such as the cold weather extremes we are seeing now.

Until Fusion arrives, the best we can do is to try and increase efficiencies in current energy production, distribution/availability, and consumption.
 
Last edited:
Let's try to keep this thread apolitical. GCC, AGW, and similar posts/topics will be removed.

My personal opinion is we need to use energy sources that are currently available and practical, while continuing research on new technologies.

We cannot use technologies that have not been fully developed nor those that are not currently available.

As young, bright-eyed physicist early in my career, I had my sights set on Nuclear Fusion research but the theoretical constructs were not fully developed, nor had the engineering hurdles been addressed. When studying the actual physics and engineering of such an undertaking, one's thinking quickly switches from fantasy to reality.

So I went into the subfield of Solar Energy Thermal processes. But for folks in Iowa and Minn. and other northern states, the energy supply was not there when the demand was critical, such as the cold weather extremes we are seeing now.

Until Fusion arrives, the best we can do is to try and increase energy efficiencies in production, distribution/availability, and consumption.
Spot on. And while we continue researching, let's keep them CATs running (y)
 
But the solution he's pursuing is fission.
That's part of the solution. Gates' solution is to go big. All inclusive. That's the difference.
It sounds to me like Mr. Gates is taking the situation seriously. I applaud that.

In no way do I intend my posts to be political. I am a scientist at heart.
If I am going over the line, I apologize and will stop.
 
My personal opinion is we need to use energy sources that are currently available and practical, while continuing research on new technologies.

We cannot use technologies that have not been fully developed nor those that are not currently available.
Of course; we are saying the same thing. There are things we can do today while working on innovation for a more pervasive solution.
30 years? 50 years? More? Only time will tell.
 
Biggest danger is going to be, as it always seems, is paying for these upgrades on the backs of the little guy. When DPFs started going on diesels, how many went on railroad locomotives, container transport ships, or other really big diesel consumers? NONE, because they had the connections to fight any legislation cutting into their profits. Ontario really seems to have a handle on electricity generation, maybe the wrong country won the War of 1812? “sarcasm”
 
That's part of the solution. Gates' solution is to go big. All inclusive. That's the difference.
It sounds to me like Mr. Gates is taking the situation seriously. I applaud that.

In no way do I intend my posts to be political. I am a scientist at heart.
If I am going over the line, I apologize and will stop.

Perhaps I wasn't sufficiently clear. Terrapower, the company Bill Gates founded, is a fission company:

Everybody with even a remote interest in nuclear is interested in fusion, it's the proverbial holy grail. But, keeping things grounded, fission is here, it works, and, with a breeder, is 100% renewable and can be built right now and displace fossil fuels from power generation right now.
 
Back
Top