N.B. Power quietly drops salt-based energy storage plan it touted as world first in 2021
Utility says no money was lost on cancelled project
An ambitious plan announced by N.B. Power two years ago to sponsor construction of a world first-of-its-kind salt-based energy storage system has been shelved indefinitely by the Crown corporation.
But unlike an earlier big idea — a hydrogen from seawater project that it lost $13 million on in 2019 — the utility says this time no funds were spent.
"N.B. Power did not invest any money in the project," wrote N.B. Power spokesperson Dominique Couture in an email to CBC News.
Less clear is whether the New Brunswick government escaped financial losses.
In October 2021, N.B. Power announced an initiative with the American company Malta Inc. to have a 100-megawatt energy storage facility built by 2024 that would be capable of discharging 1,000 megawatt hours of electricity over a 10-hour period.
A
model of what a 100-megawatt Malta energy storage system planned for
New Brunswick was expected to look like. N.B. Power was initially
excited by the idea of converting electricity into heat and back again
even though Malta has not yet built a working plant. (Malta Inc / Linkedin)
The plant proposed to take electricity from N.B. Power's transmission grid at minimal cost during low demand periods and convert it into heat to be stored in tanks of molten salt at temperatures up to 565 C.
From there the heat was to be reconverted into electricity and sent back to the grid when needed. It was called an "exciting" idea by N.B. Power that would help it manage peak loads as well as even out the up-and-down electrical output of provincial windmills.
"This initiative demonstrates N.B. Power's leadership role in helping New Brunswick transition to a low-carbon economy," it said in its 2021 announcement.
N.B. Power has been looking for ways to store electricity to help manage the up-and-down production of windmills on its system. (Shane Fowler/CBC News)
By size, the project would have eclipsed the largest electricity storage system in Atlantic Canada several times over. Saint John Energy currently claims that title with four utility-sized Tesla batteries that combined can store 7.5 megawatts of electricity.
Although Malta has never built one of its energy storage plants, N.B. Power was confident enough that the unique technology would work; it took the unusual step of announcing both a projected starting date for the plant and likely employment levels.
Malta
announced its partnership with N.B. Power on Twitter (now X) in 2021.
No similar announcements were made when the relationship eventually
fizzled. (Malta/X)
"While still in the planning and development stage the facility is targeted to be in-service in 2024," said the announcement.
"Upon its completion, the 1,000 mwh (megawatt hour) facility would be one of the largest energy storage systems of its kind in the world, and lead to the creation of an estimated 225 new jobs during construction, and up to 15 during operation,"
However, little has been said about the plan by N.B. Power since and this summer in an updated "integrated resource plan" issued for its next 20 years, the salt-based energy storage plant was conspicuously absent.
In an email, Couture said N.B. Power came to view the project as too expensive and dropped it.
"Based on the information we had at the time of publishing the IRP, (integrated resource plan) the Malta energy storage solution was not considered an early-term, least-cost resource addition," wrote Couture.
In a brief interview last week, Malta's head of sustainability, Luke Rose, said he is unable to discuss why the project was abandoned.
"We have a company policy not to comment on internal decision-making processes of our customers, so I have no comment for you," said Rose.
Malta now says it expects to have its first plant in service in 2027 but won't say who it is for or where it will be.
Although N.B. Power said it did not spend any money on the cancelled project, the New Brunswick government's financial involvement is less certain.
Former
N.B. Power CEO Gaëtan Thomas, centre, poses with Joi Scientific
executives Robert Koeneman, left, and Traver Kennedy on a beach in Cape
Canaveral, Fla. N.B. Power spent $13 million on a failed attempt to make
the company's plan to extract hydrogen from seawater work. (Joi Scientific)
In 2021 the province's economic development agency Opportunities New Brunswick was included with Malta and N.B. Power as a participant in the original announcement.
And in a second announcement last year Malta and a department of the University of New Brunswick were awarded a grant from the New Brunswick Innovation Foundation to study "advanced modularization" construction techniques that Malta could use to build its plant.
The minister responsible for Opportunities New Brunswick at the time of both Malta announcements was Arlene Dunn and she is quoted in press releases for each as backing the energy storage project.
"Our government remains committed to supporting energy innovation across the province," said Dunn in the construction study funding announcement.
Statements
by Arlene Dunn supporting the Malta energy storage project appeared in
press releases in 2021 and 2022 when she was the minister responsible
for Opportunities New Brunswick. Despite that, the agency says it did
not directly give any money to the company behind the project. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
In response to questions about the extent of government financial involvement in the energy storage proposal a spokesperson for Opportunities New Brunswick said "no financial support" was provided directly to Malta.
However, explanations about why Opportunities New Brunswick was involved in both Malta announcements if it had no financial involvement in the energy storage proposal were not immediately provided.
N.B. Power has been burned financially by big ideas and world-first projects in the past. In addition to its failed hydrogen from seawater investments, the utility suffered major losses by undertaking the first ever refurbishment of a CANDU 6 reactor in 2008.
Estimates from Atomic Energy of Canada that the renovation would cost $1.5 billion and take 18 months to complete proved ruinously optimistic with work dragging on more than 50 months and going $1 billion over budget.
Earlier this year N.B. Power issued a scaled down request for proposals for the supply of 50 megawatts of battery storage with the capability to discharge electricity over four hours.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
MR. STEWART: Good afternoon, everyone. I see some people are still
-- it looks like they are connecting so if you just bear with us for a
moment until they are connected. All right. I guess it is now good
afternoon, everyone. This is the continuation of the hearing of an
application by NB Power for certain variances to the Board’s
directives issued in Matters 430 and 541.
Mr. Amos, I see you are able to join us again this afternoon. Do you
wish to make any comments or submissions with respect to this
application? And if you do, please make them now.
MR. AMOS: Yes, can you hear me?
MR. STEWART: I can hear you, Mr. Amos.
MR. AMOS: Thanks for having me back in. What happened there? I
was talking and everything shut down. Did you hear anything that I
said the last time?
MR. STEWART: Not a word, unfortunately, no, we didn’t hear anything
you said. So please make whatever submissions you would like to make
now.
MR. AMOS: Yeah, I was in the middle of talking and everything went
away. So I sent you a couple of emails in the meantime, and then I
got notice that you were starting again at noon. So we are back.
What I said out of the gate is I understand the nature of the hearing
today because of the -– the executive orders recently, and I
understand NB Power needs extra time to make an application and I do
not disagree with that, okay.
What I have a problem with is in July, NB Power sent me notice
that they were taking your Board to court, are you aware of this?
The only hearing -- the only thing that we are going to discuss in
this hearing this afternoon is the application --
MR. AMOS: Well how can you -- how can you have another rate hearing
-- how can you have another rate hearing when you are being sued about
the last one?
MR. STEWART: Mr. Amos, do you have any comments on the application
by NB Power in this Matter? I believe you have said that you --
MR. AMOS: Yes --
MR. STEWART: -- do not disagree with the request.
MR. AMOS: -- I think -- yes, I have a comment.
MR. STEWART: Please make your comment.
MR. AMOS: I think the matter in court should be resolved before you
go into another one.
would like to say with respect to the --
MR. AMOS: Would you like to meet me in federal court?
MR. STEWART: -- relief sought -- excuse me. Let me finish, Mr.
Amos. Do you have anything else to say --
MR. AMOS: NB Power is a Crown Corporation --
MR. STEWART: Mr. Amos, I am going to ask you --
MR. AMOS: -- would you like to meet me in federal court?
MR. STEWART: Mr. Amos, would you please let me -- please wait until
I finish speaking, and then you can say. Do you have anything else
you wish to comment on with respect to the relief or the application
that NB Power has brought before the Board today? Limit your comments
to that. Anything else you would like to say?
MR. AMOS: Or call Mr. Higgs. Have yourself a good day.
MR. STEWART: Thank you. All right. Mr. Furey, strictly speaking,
I am not sure what you -- but I would give you an opportunity such as
it is to respond, if you wish, to anything that Mr. Amos had to say in
his submissions?
MR. FUREY: I have no further submissions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
May 4, 2022– Cambridge, Mass. – Malta Inc., a leading innovator of grid-scale, long-duration energy storage (LDES), announced today that it continues to build out its management team with the addition of project finance veteran Alex Hernandez as General Counsel. This follows on Malta’s announcement of new Board Chair, Alexandra “Alie” Pruner, in April.
"We have a company policy not to comment on internal decision-making processes of our customers, so I have no comment for you," said Rose.
Malta now says it expects to have its first plant in service in 2027 but won't say who it is for or where it will be.
Although N.B. Power said it did not spend any money on the cancelled project, the New Brunswick government's financial involvement is less certain.
Critics warn that utility’s new subsidiaries will lack transparency, carry risk
Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Apr 14, 2022 7:00 AM ADT
"We've given them a mandate to reach certain debt reduction targets," Holland said. "And we've also told them all hands on deck [with] whatever means with which you can find opportunities," he said.
But opposition parties say the changes to the Electricity Act are vague and could lead the public utility into risky new projects that end up costing ratepayers even more.
"Given the track record of N.B. Power with things like the whole effort in Florida to look at trying to generate power out of seawater, they shouldn't be going anywhere near creating other subsidiaries," said Green Party leader David Coon.
Natural Resources and Energy Development Minister Mike Holland said he expects to know by June how N.B. Power plans to tackle its debt. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
Liberal MLA and energy critic René Legacy says the only examples of potential new N.B. Power business ventures Holland has spoken about are industrial light and the renting of water heaters, something the utility does now.
"Well, you're not going to fix N.B. Power's debt with water heater rentals," he said. "That's not realistic."
Holland says he plans to meet with utility executives "before the end of this legislative session" in mid-June to find out how they plan to use their new powers.
Cabinet will have to approve any new subsidiaries.
No one from the utility was available for an interview Wednesday. "N.B. Power will look at opportunities that could benefit customers and the utility before moving forward with a new competitive entity," spokesperson Marc Belliveau said in an email."
Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Jul 28, 2023 3:48 PM ADT
The utility's nuclear generation station at Point Lepreau also had a bad year, forcing N.B. Power to buy replacement power from Quebec.
The extra electricity purchases cost $269 million and were offset by $34 million of extra revenue from higher-than-expected electricity sales, leaving a total of almost $234 million in losses in the deferral account.
The surcharges to customers are subject to approval by the Energy Utilities Board and can't add more than three per cent to any regular rate increase.
The losses make it more difficult for N.B. Power to reach the target set by the Higgs government of getting its debt to 80 per cent of equity by 2027.
The utility pointed to that objective in a recently filed court application attempting to overturn a March rate ruling by the EUB.
N.B. Power asked the EUB for an 8.9 per cent rate hike to take effect April 1, but the board ruled that updated figures from the utility warranted only a 5.7 per cent increase.
A surplus in the deferral account last October required the corporation to rebate customers, which shaved another percentage point off its rate increase, reducing it to 4.8.
But the utility says the EUB failed to use a broader set of new numbers in its decision and also failed to take into account that 2027 debt-to-equity ratio goal.
It's asking the New Brunswick Court of Appeal to award it the 8.9 per cent increase it asked for.
Saturday, 29 July 2023
N.B. Power lost $43M last year, saw total debt increase to $5.4B
YO Higgy One month later and still CBC does not consider the Court of Appeal File No. 68-23-CA - Judicial Review of Board Decision in Matter 541 newsworthy EH?
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
Glenn Zacher<GZacher@stikeman.com> | Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 10:01 PM | ||||||||
| To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |||||||||
I am in out of the office until Aug 14, 2023 and may be delayed in responding. If your matter is urgent, please contact my assistant Sofia at scasinha@stikeman.com or 416 869 6703. Thank you
| |||||||||
David Amos<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 9:59 PM |
| To: "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, "hugh.flemming" <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, "Robert. Jones" <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, "andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, "jeff.carr" <jeff.carr@gnb.ca>, "John.Williamson" <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, "rob.moore" <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, "Jack.Keir" <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>, "jacques.j.leblanc" <jacques.j.leblanc@gnb.ca>, "jake.stewart" <jake.stewart@parl.gc.ca>, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, "Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)" <kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca>, "robert.gauvin" <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>, "robert.mckee" <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>, John Furey <JohnFurey@fureylegal.com>, "Holland, Mike (LEG)" <mike.holland@gnb.ca>, "kris.austin" <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, "martin.gaudet" <martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>, "Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, crystal.critch@gnb.ca, "Mitchell, Kathleen" <Kathleen.Mitchell@nbeub.ca>, "Aherrington@lawsoncreamer.com" <Aherrington@lawsoncreamer.com>, Melissa Curran <Melissa.Curran@nbeub.ca>, "Young, Dave" <Dave.Young@nbeub.ca>, "Michael.Dickie@nbeub.ca" <Michael.Dickie@nbeub.ca>, Veronique Otis <Veronique.Otis@nbeub.ca>, "Colwell, Susan" <Susan.Colwell@nbeub.ca>, "Chiasson, Alain (OAG/CPG)" <Alain.Chiasson2@gnb.ca>, "Hoyt, Len" <len.hoyt@mcinnescooper.com>, "Glenn Zacher (gzacher@stikeman.com)" <GZacher@stikeman.com>, "rburgoyne@coxandpalmer.com" <rburgoyne@coxandpalmer.com>, "louis-philippe.gauthier@cfib.ca" <louis-philippe.gauthier@cfib.ca>, "frederic.gionet@cfib.ca" <frederic.gionet@cfib.ca>, "daly@nbnet.nb.ca" <daly@nbnet.nb.ca>, "david.sollows@gnb.ca" <david.sollows@gnb.ca>, "Brandy.Gellner@libertyutilities.com" <Brandy.Gellner@libertyutilities.com>, "Gilles.volpe@libertyutilities.com" <Gilles.volpe@libertyutilities.com>, "dave.lavigne@libertyutilities.com" <dave.lavigne@libertyutilities.com>, "Waycott, Stephen" <SWaycott@nbpower.com>, "Gordon, Laura" <LGordon@nbpower.com> | |
| Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, nouvelle@acadienouvelle.com, Frederic Cammarano <frederic.cammarano@radio-canada.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com> | |
Saturday, 29 July 2023 N.B. Power lost $43M last year, saw total debt increase to $5.4B | |
N.B. Power lost $43M last year, saw total debt increase to $5.4B
Customers face rate surcharges if additional off-the-books losses aren’t erased by fall
Financial statements filed at the legislature show a loss of $43 million in fiscal 2022-23, mostly due to problems at the utility's Bayside natural gas plant and its Point Lepreau nuclear generating station.
CEO Lori Clark cited outages at the two plants, higher prices and other factors.
"NB Power operates in a complex business environment and we experienced many challenges in 2022/23 that were outside of our control, including higher fuel prices due to the global energy crisis and inflation," Clark said in a statement.
N.B.
Power CEO Lori Clark said there were a number of things 'that were
outside of our control, including higher fuel prices,' soaring
inflation, and outages at Bayside and Lepreau. (Ed Hunter/CBC)
The figure of $43 million doesn't include another $234 million in losses that the Crown corporation is allowed to shift off its balance sheet and into a separate deferral account — essentially a different accounting envelope.
It can then recoup the money from customers with surcharges.
That calculation will be made in October, meaning an influx in revenue in the next three months could erase or reduce the losses in the deferral account and avoid or mitigate the need for surcharges.
Customers would see those extra amounts on their bills next April.
Either way, the 2022-23 statements show that losses that have driven N.B. Power's debt back up to 94 per cent of its equity, the same as it was in 2020.
The progress it was making — the figure was down to 87 per cent in 2022 — has been wiped out. The debt now stands at $5.4 billion.
The Bayside natural gas generating station is part of N.B. Power's
Courtney Bay generating complex in Saint John. (Robert Jones/CBC)
N.B. Power saw its costs soar last year after its Bayside gas plant in Saint John required a new turbine and generator at a cost of around $46 million — the same price the utility paid to buy the facility in 2019.
The utility's nuclear generation station at Point Lepreau also had a bad year, forcing N.B. Power to buy replacement power from Quebec.
The extra electricity purchases cost $269 million and were offset by $34 million of extra revenue from higher-than-expected electricity sales, leaving a total of almost $234 million in losses in the deferral account.
The surcharges to customers are subject to approval by the Energy Utilities Board and can't add more than three per cent to any regular rate increase.
The losses make it more difficult for N.B. Power to reach the target set by the Higgs government of getting its debt to 80 per cent of equity by 2027.
The utility pointed to that objective in a recently filed court application attempting to overturn a March rate ruling by the EUB.
8.9% hike requested
N.B. Power asked the EUB for an 8.9 per cent rate hike to take effect April 1, but the board ruled that updated figures from the utility warranted only a 5.7 per cent increase.
A surplus in the deferral account last October required the corporation to rebate customers, which shaved another percentage point off its rate increase, reducing it to 4.8.
But the utility says the EUB failed to use a broader set of new numbers in its decision and also failed to take into account that 2027 debt-to-equity ratio goal.
It's asking the New Brunswick Court of Appeal to award it the 8.9 per cent increase it asked for.
Clark's statement said the corporation's leadership is "committed to making the necessary changes to improve N.B. Power's financial situation and are expecting stronger results in the new 2023/24 fiscal year."
She said the new strategic plan includes "transforming our overall operations and seeking new partnerships to positively impact the bottom line."
Point
Lepreau also had a bad year, forcing N.B. Power to buy replacement
power from Quebec for $269 million, although that was offset by $34
million of extra revenue from higher-than-expected electricity sales,
leaving a total of almost $234 million in losses in the deferral
account. (Shane Fowler/CBC)
Among those partnerships is a possible deal with Ontario Power Generation to have that utility take an ownership stake in Point Lepreau.
But even that, and a court victory awarding N.B. Power a higher rate increase, wouldn't mark the end of the utility's financial challenges.
It recently filed its environmental impact assessment application for an upgrade of the Mactaquac hydroelectric power dam that could cost $2.7 billion to $3.7 billion and must be undertaken soon.
N.B. Power also has yet to settle on how — or whether — to convert its Belledune coal generating station to another energy source — another costly project — ahead of a federal phase-out of coal power in 2030.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
"It's asking the New Brunswick Court of Appeal to award it the 8.9 per cent increase it asked for"
New N.B. Power plan shows 'considerable uncertainty' on net-zero emissions
‘No silver bullet’ to hit federal target in 2035, utility says in new electricity projection
A mix of wind power, a costly upgrade to the Mactaquac dam, an extension to the life of its Bayside gas-fired plant and small modular reactors are all essential, the utility says in its latest three-year outlook.
"The general takeaway is that there is no silver bullet," says the 2023 Integrated Resource Plan, filed with the Energy and Utilities Board last week.
N.B. Power updates the document every three years with a rolling projection of where and how it can generate electricity to meet demand at as low a cost as possible.
That forecast has become increasingly complicated, given the utility's huge debt, increasingly stringent federal emissions-reduction requirements and the looming need to shut down or extend several major power plants.
The
Bayside natural gas generating station is part of N.B. Power's Courtney
Bay generating complex in Saint John. An extension to the life of this
plant may be needed. (Robert Jones/CBC)
The document acknowledges that there are still big questions on how N.B. Power can comply with national objectives to combat climate change.
It says the utility "continues to explore options" for the Belledune generating station, which must stop burning coal by 2030.
Another section says there remains "considerable uncertainty on achieving a net-zero electricity system in New Brunswick."
Still, the plan shows which way N.B. Power is leaning: toward small modular nuclear reactors and away from a costly linking of five provincial power grids known as the Atlantic Loop.
Without small modular reactors, the resource plan says, the utility will have to rely on "variable" renewable power generation, like wind and solar, that depend on weather conditions.
That would would mean "completely altering the dynamics of daily operations, creating significant risk."
N.B.
Power's latest resource plan says the Mactaquac hydro dam — in need of a
$3-billion refurbishment — remains 'a key pillar in the transition to a
net-zero electricity system.' (Shane Fowler/CBC News )
It also says the cost of developing small modular nuclear reactors are a "significant unknown," and the timing of their deployment will depend on the pace of technology development.
"Until more certainty on all of these issues is obtained, a full cost-benefit analysis cannot be completed and therefore is not in this analysis," the plan says.
Assessment ordered by province
ARC Clean Energy told a committee of MLAs earlier this year that it should have a 100-megawatt reactor ready by 2030, but that wouldn't be enough to replace what Belledune generates with coal.
The province announced Thursday it was ordering an environmental impact assessment of ARC's proposal.
Moltex Energy, the other company working on a model in New Brunswick, plans 300-megawatt reactors but says they won't be ready for 2030.
The report touts the potential job and economic impact of the two companies' SMR models, including a projected $1 billion in additional gross domestic product.
The
Atlantic Loop would expand the electrical grid connections between
Quebec and New Brunswick and New Brunswick and Nova Scotia to provide
greater access to renewable electricity, like hydro from Quebec. (CBC)
The plan has no such promotion of the economic upside of the Atlantic Loop, which would connect the grids in the four Atlantic provinces and Quebec to allow for more sharing of hydroelectric power from Quebec and Labrador.
Instead, it pegs the cost of constructing new transmission links and buying extra hydro power from Quebec at $270-$310 million in the 2040s, seven to nine per cent higher than the cost of other scenarios that don't include the loop.
The scramble for non-emitting electricity generation is driven by the federal government's climate targets, which include net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and net-zero electricity generation even sooner — by 2035.
The federal government has said that N.B. Power's Belledune generating
station will not be allowed to burn coal past 2030. (N.B. Power)
The new resource plan says N.B. Power will have eliminated 98 per cent of its emissions from electricity by then, with the remaining two per cent — about 175,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas, the equivalent of 3,500 cars — needed to ensure the grid is reliable.
Plants like Bayside and Coleson Cove might have to remain in service to provide that backup power past 2035.
"The small volume of outstanding emissions can be more appropriately addressed in subsequent IRPs as the future landscape and policies become more certain," the plan says.
The utility has asked for proposals for new wind, solar, tidal and battery storage programs and has been promoting energy efficiency.
But those efforts won't get far without a major shift in its large-scale generating capacity away from fossil fuels.
That's why the Mactaquac hydro dam — in need of a $3-billion refurbishment to extend its life to 2068 — remains "a key pillar in the transition to a net-zero electricity system," the report says.
The fossil fuel powered generating station at Coleson Cove might have
to remain in service to provide backup power past 2035. (Roger
Cosman/CBC)
"Mactaquac plays a valuable role of enabling the low-cost integration of renewables which becomes increasingly important in the future."
Without the dam to fill the gap on days with no sun or no wind, "the costs quickly balloon," the report says.
The Atlantic Loop is projected to cost $6 billion.
Ottawa announced new policies earlier this year, including loans and tax credits, that could make the project more affordable for provinces and their power utilities.
But N.B. Power's plan says the overall price tag remains "a significant hurdle" because the electricity imported from Quebec would not always be available, forcing the utility to maintain costly generation capacity in New Brunswick.
"There would need to be a larger savings on the side of generation and purchased power costs to make the project viable, but we see the opposite happening," the report says.
Debt reduction ordered
Cost is a major issue for the utility, whose latest financial statements show its cumulative debt climbing back up to $5.4 billion, or 94 per cent of its equity.
The Higgs government has ordered it to reduce its debt to 80 per cent of equity by 2027 — a tall order with several costly projects on the horizon.
According to the resource plan, a survey of New Brunswickers showed that customers consider low power rates a higher priority than clean energy or debt management.
In a recent Narrative Research poll, 79 per cent of New Brunswick respondents said they were concerned about climate change, and 70 per cent agreed that the increasing frequency and intensity of heat waves and forest fires are linked to climate change.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2023/02/new-brunswicks-energy-puzzle-comes-into.html
Friday, 24 February 2023
New Brunswick's energy puzzle comes into focus at climate committee meetings
New Brunswick's energy puzzle comes into focus at climate committee meetings
Hearings on small nuclear reactors highlight N.B. Power’s electricity challenge in coming decades
It became clear small modular nuclear reactors aren't, on their own, the magic bullet that will replace coal in the next seven years, or achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.
But utility officials made it equally clear it'll be much harder to get there without them.
"The one thing I can tell you based on what we know today is there's no one solution. We need to throw everything we've got at a net-zero future," said Brad Coady, N.B. Power's executive director of business development and strategic planning.
Coady underscored the key role of emissions-free nuclear power when he told MLAs that if the Point Lepreau generating station near Saint John hadn't started operating in 1983, there would now probably be three coal-fired power plants in Belledune, in northern New Brunswick, not just one.
"Our whole carbon picture in New Brunswick would be completely different," he said.
N.B.
Power's Brad Coady said giving up the Mactaquac Dam's clean, renewable,
emissions-free electricity is virtually unthinkable in light of the
net-zero target. (John Collicott/CBC News)
Coady acknowledged cost overruns and performance issues at Point Lepreau but said without the plant, three coal plants in Belledune might be generating 2,000 megawatts of greenhouse-gas emitting power, not just the current 450.
"That would have been an absolute nightmare to solve today if we hadn't had nuclear in our mix."
Renewable power not enough, MLA told
The two days of meetings of the legislature's climate change and environmental stewardship committee were held so supporters and opponents of small reactors could make their case.
But at times the sessions turned into a Jenga-like head-scratcher illustrating the complex challenge — and the high-risk decisions — facing the province.
MLAs were told renewable power, like wind and solar, won't be enough to hit key deadlines.
Belledune is New Brunswick's last coal-fired power plant and must shut down, or convert to another fuel source, in time for a federal coal phaseout in 2030.
There's also a net-zero carbon goal looming in 2050.
N.B. Power and the province are grappling with whether to extend the
life of the utility's largest hydroelectric dam at Mactaquac, west of
Fredericton on the St. John River. (James West/The Canadian Press)
At the same time, N.B. Power and the province are grappling with whether to extend the life of the utility's largest hydroelectric dam at Mactaquac, west of Fredericton on the St. John River.
And it's all happening amid record growth in the province — growth that will likely drive greater demand for electricity.
The utility says the all-time record for peak demand, set the morning of Feb. 4 of this year in the midst of a harsh winter cold snap, won't be the last.
"It's a trend. We're going to set peak demand records on a regular basis as we go forward," said Andy Hayward, the utility's chief nuclear engineer.
"We're going to attract more population to the province. We're going to attract industry to the province. The demand's going to go up."
Bill Labbe of ARC Clean Energy says its first small modular reactor will be ready by 2030. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
Quebec wasn't able to export surplus power from its grid to New Brunswick on Feb. 4, Hayward said, and there was actually too much wind for turbines to generate power.
"One of the reasons we look to nuclear is it's available 24/7," Hayward said.
He and Coady cited a 2021 paper by University of New Brunswick economist and research chair Herb Emery, which said without Lepreau the province might still be emitting greenhouse gases at much higher 2005 levels.
What, then, are the pieces of the puzzle N.B. Power has to work with?
If nuclear power is a valid option, the question becomes whether the two companies developing small reactors in Saint John can pull it off and by what date.
Rory O'Sullivan, CEO of Moltex Energy, says his company's proposed SMR won't be ready for 2030. (Ed Hunter/CBC)
ARC Clean Energy says its first SMR will be ready to operate at Point Lepreau by 2030. But its 100 megawatts would not be enough to replace Belledune's 450 megawatts from coal.
There would still be "a significant shortfall in megawatts," ARC CEO Bill Labbe said.
Moltex Energy Canada's proposed SMR, also to be located at Lepreau, would generate 300 megawatts, coming closer to filling the gap.
But company CEO Rory O'Sullivan said it won't be ready for 2030.
Moltex's technology will use waste from the existing Point Lepreau generating station to power its reactor. O'Sullivan said the company will build its waste facility by 2030 "or just after," and the reactor itself after that.
So SMRs won't be enough to make up for Belledune in time for 2030 — even assuming Mactaquac remains in place.
Small
modular nuclear reactors operating at Point Lepreau may not be, on
their own, the magic bullet that will replace coal in the next seven
years. (Submitted by NB Power)
N.B. Power's been talking about the dam refurbishment for a decade but no final decision has been made on the project, which carries an estimated cost of around $3 billion or more.
As pricey as that is, Coady told MLAs that giving up the dam's clean, renewable, emissions-free electricity is virtually unthinkable in light of the net-zero target.
"It almost becomes a no-brainer," he said.
"You almost need to have it. There's alternatives if you don't [but] the costs of those alternatives are going to make Mactaquac look like it's very cheap, good value for money. We're going to have to get there."
The dam also makes it easier for the utility to add other renewable sources to its grid, he said, because a dam can run all-out when demand is high, then gear down and store water during less busy times when wind can take over.
Importing power another option
N.B. Power recently issued a new request for proposals for an additional 220 megawatts of renewable power, the majority of it from wind, and 50 megawatts of battery storage capacity that would give it more flexibility when demand fluctuates.
It's also shopping for a supply what's called torrified biomass in the coming year and will test it in March 2024 to see if it burns well at Belledune.
Coady said the biomass product resembles charcoal briquettes and "kind of mimics the actions of coal."
It could burn enough to replace Belledune's full 450-megawatt update and would be considered carbon neutral because it would come from sustainably harvested forests, the utility said.
Importing power is another piece of the puzzle, especially if the proposed Atlantic Loop — a regional connection of provincial power grids — is built, allowing N.B. Power to buy more hydroelectricity from Quebec and Labrador.
N.B. Power will issue its latest integrated resource plan this fall, a document published every three years that projects where and how it will generate electricity into the future.
Coady pointed out that when the last one was published in 2020, Ottawa hadn't approved the province's carbon pricing system for large industry.
And at the time the one before that was released, there was no federal requirement to phase out coal — so the plan will always have to adapt to new realities and alternative scenarios, he told the committee.
"There will be a Plan B, C and D for net zero for New Brunswick, under all scenarios with and without nuclear, and with and without Mactaquac, I might add."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
1. Like it or not, the rate increase NB Power is looking for will be the norm (if not even higher) for well into the future
2. With Belledune coal phased out by 2030 (just 7 years away), we could well be looking at electricity shortages at times right here in NB
3. Demand for electricity will definitely be going up
4. NB Power will have to refurbish/rebuild Mactaquac
5. The path to net zero by 2050 is about as clear as the mud (thanks Justin and Stevie Greenpeace)
6. Carbon taxes have done nothing, and will continue to do nothing, to drive the transition to lower carbon emissions (all they contribute to is a higher inflation rate).
from big polluters which provincial governments are protecting. But what The Activist Steve is doing wrong is not having affordable alternatives available.
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2023/07/clean-fuel-charges-in-new-brunswick.html
Thursday, 6 July 2023
Clean fuel charges in New Brunswick will be double those in N.S., N.L.
Automatic reply: YO Teddy Why doesn't Mr Jones consider Court of Appeal File No. 68-23-CA - Judicial Review of Board Decision in Matter 541 newsworthy?
Carr, Jeff (LEG)<Jeff.Carr@gnb.ca> | Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 11:30 AM | ||||||||
| To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |||||||||
Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly valued. You can be assured that all emails are carefully
read, reviewed and taken into consideration.
If your concern is constituency related, please contact Rose Ann at my constituency office in Fredericton Junction at RoseAnn.Smith@gnb.ca or call 506-368-2938. Thanks again for your email. ============================== Merci pour votre courriel. Vos pensées et commentaires sont grandement appréciés. Vous pouvez être assuré que tous les courriels sont lus, examinés et pris en considération. Si vous souhaitez signaler un état de la route, veuillez composer le 1-833-384-4111 ou envoyer un courriel à transportnb@gnb.ca. Si votre préoccupation concerne la circonscription, veuillez communiquer avec Rose Ann à mon bureau de circonscription à Fredericton Junction à RoseAnn.Smith@gnb.ca ou composer le 506-368-2938. Merci encore pour votre courriel.
| |||||||||
Gilles Volpé<Gilles.Volpe@libertyutilities.com> | Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 2:23 AM |
| To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
Hi: Thx for your message. I am currently out of the office on vacation returning on Tuesday July 11. I will be checking messages periodically.
Thx, Gilles
Bonjour: Je suis en dehors du bureau jusqu'au mardi 11 juillet. Je vais vérifier mes messages périodiquement.
This message and any attachments contain confidential information and
are solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
recipient, any dissemination, review, disclosure, forwarding,
distribution, copying or reliance on the contents of this message is
strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately by email if
you have received this message in error and delete this message
immediately from your system. | |
Clean fuel charges in New Brunswick will be double those in N.S., N.L.
On Friday, 8 cents will be added to prices in N.B., but only 4 cents elsewhere
Newfoundland and Labrador imposed the exact same charges in that province early Thursday morning.
The amounts are half of what is expected to be an eight-cent charge in New Brunswick.
Parties connected to the petroleum industry in Nova Scotia pushed for the province to follow New Brunswick's eight-cent plan, but the board found fault with that approach, according to David Roberts.
"Nobody thought that the cost was really going to reach that amount," said Roberts, who is Nova Scotia's consumer advocate.
David
Roberts acts as consumer advocate at Nova Scotia's Utilities and Review
Board. He argued against allowing oil companies to charge an extra
eight cents to pay for federal clean-fuel standards, like in New
Brunswick. The body settled on half that amount. (CBC)
He argued an eight-cent increase is well beyond expenses oil companies are likely to face and would punish drivers needlessly.
"There's not going to be any rebates going back to consumers if, as it turns out, they were paying four or five cents a litre more than the clean fuel regulations would have required to compensate suppliers," he said in an interview.
Campaign launched over cost
The New Brunswick government has been waging a major social media and advertising campaign to convince residents the upcoming eight-cent increase on gasoline and diesel is required.
It claims the full amount is necessary to help oil companies pay for the high cost of federal clean fuel regulations that otherwise they would claw from the vulnerable retailers they supply.
"New Brunswick has made amendments to how regulators set maximum prices because if this change was not made, small retailers in the province would have to absorb the additional cost of the federal government's clean fuel regulation," the province wrote in materials distributed last week that included rare, full front-page newspaper advertisements.
"Prices may go up by as much as eight cents per litre as a result of the clean fuel regulations."
But Nova Scotia has decided four cents should be adequate, a ruling that will save consumers in that province about $1 million a week in clean fuel charges over what New Brunswick consumers will pay.
Clean fuel regulations took effect in Canada on July 1, but costs associated with them are to be included in formulas that set regulated prices in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick for the first time this Friday.
The national regulations are meant to cut the "carbon intensity" of automotive fuels sold across the country.
The
New Brunswick government took out a full two-page ad in the
Telegraph-Journal last week to criticize federal carbon policies. The
ads blame Ottawa entirely for the eight-cent fuel-price increase. (Robert Jones/CBC)
They are aimed at making refiners and importers of fuel lower the emission intensity of products they manufacture or resell by setting targets for those emissions and establishing financial rewards and penalties to reach them.
The regulations do not apply to heating fuels or to petroleum products exported from Canada.
Companies can earn credits by changing practices
Refiners can comply with the new rules in different ways, including putting more ethanol in domestic gasoline, selling biodiesel products or finding ways to reduce their own refining emissions.
Companies that come in below the federal government's emissions intensity ceiling will earn credits they can sell on a market being set up for that purpose. Other producers can buy those credits if their fuels fall short.
It's also possible to earn credits through investments in things unrelated to refining, like electric-vehicle charging stations.
Oil companies have complained that making those changes will be costly and, in response, the New Brunswick and Nova Scotia governments each passed new rules to allow those costs to be passed to consumers.
The New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board and Nova Scotia's Utilities and Review Board each held its own hearing to determine what those costs might be, but ultimately reached different conclusions.
Both regulators hired Angie Brown, with the consulting company Grant Thornton, to report on what would be fair.
She built a model around existing clean fuel rules and credit-trading markets operating in California and estimated, based on the California experience, it would take roughly eight cents per litre added to gasoline and diesel retail prices in both provinces to compensate refiners and importers.
Brown was questioned about the relevance of using California data to estimate costs of the new Canadian policy, but she said there were few examples to go by.
"I acknowledge this is an imperfect solution and relying on actual data would likely get you a better outcome," said Brown during her Nova Scotia testimony.
However, she argued if oil companies were under-compensated for new costs, they could decide to stop supplying local markets.
"I think there are some pretty significant risks if you do take the wait-and-see approach," she said.
Too early to fix costs, consultant says
Brown's modelling and recommendations went largely uncontested in New Brunswick, but not in Nova Scotia.
The Nova Scotia board hired a second expert who argued that because no one knows yet how expensive the new clean fuel rules will be, it is too early to charge consumers for them.
Vijay Muralidharan, with Calgary's R Cube Economic Consulting Inc., agreed the new regulations will add costs to oil companies, but said regulators should wait at least a couple of months to get some data on how companies actually respond to the rules.
"Any cost projection at this point would be an estimation with a relatively high degree of potential error, said Muralidharan in his evidence.
The
Shell refinery, upgrader and petrochemical facility northeast of
Edmonton has installed solar panels and signed wind energy contracts to
cut down on the greenhouse gases it emits during manufacturing. It's the
kind of change new federal clean-fuel standards are seeking to force on
the petroleum industry. (Kyle Bakx/CBC)
"Therefore, we recommend that the Board wait and conduct a study with the primary suppliers of fuel, once the new Clean Fuel Standard has been initiated, to understand the realized impact on their business before amending the current regulatory framework."
Reasons for the decision have not yet been issued, but its ruling to add four cents of clean fuel costs falls halfway between Grant Thornton's eight-cent recommendation and R Cube's advice of no immediate increase.
Roberts said R Cube's involvement in the Nova Scotia hearing likely had an important influence on the outcome, that was missing in New Brunswick.
"The difference is that there were no alternate scenarios put to the New Brunswick board other than the one that was included in the Grant Thornton report," said Roberts.
"The New Brunswick board accepted the [Grant Thornton] recommendation. The Nova Scotia board did not."
Newfoundland and Labrador regulators have not held a hearing on clean fuel costs yet but were instructed by the province to implement an interim charge and earlier Thursday selected Nova Scotia's amounts as its own.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
"The New Brunswick government has been waging a major social media and advertising campaign to convince residents the upcoming eight-cent increase on gasoline and diesel is required."
- does it really amount to 8 cents/litre? I highly doubt it.
-why did the NB EUB approve this increase? No doubt because that was what Higgs wanted from them, and he pretty much controls it.
-why does any increase become effective before suppliers are even providing us with the cleaner fuel that we're supposed to be paying for? The provincial government argument doesn't convince me.
Seems like there's some skunks that need to get flushed out of the woodpile.
Sadly we all realize this 8 cents is just pathetic. It should be 100 cents. We all have to pull together, as Canadians, and do our fair part in reducing the global C2O pollutions that increase our climate temperatures. It's collective effort Canadians - all will have to chip in much more to stop the carbones.
YO Teddy Why doesn't Mr Jones consider Court of Appeal File No. 68-23-CA - Judicial Review of Board Decision in Matter 541 newsworthy?
Moore, Rob - M.P.<Rob.Moore@parl.gc.ca> | Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 11:30 AM |
| To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
*This is an automated response*
Thank you for contacting the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P. office. We appreciate the time you took to get in touch with our office.
If you did not already, please ensure to include your full contact details on your email and the appropriate staff will be able to action your request. We strive to ensure all constituent correspondence is responded to in a timely manner.
If your question or concern is time sensitive, please call our office: 506-832-4200.
Again, we thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Office of the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P. Member of Parliament for Fundy Royal | |
Newsroom<newsroom@globeandmail.com> | Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 11:31 AM |
| To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail. If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical support, please contact our Customer Service department
at 1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail. If you are reporting a factual error please forward your email to publiceditor@globeandmail.com Letters to the Editor can be sent to letters@globeandmail.com This is the correct email address for requests for news coverage and press releases. | |
David Amos<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 11:30 AM | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| To: "hugh.flemming" <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, "Robert. Jones" <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, "andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, "jeff.carr" <jeff.carr@gnb.ca>, "John.Williamson" <John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, "rob.moore" <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, "Jack.Keir" <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>, "jacques.j.leblanc" <jacques.j.leblanc@gnb.ca>, "jake.stewart" <jake.stewart@parl.gc.ca>, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, "Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)" <kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca>, "robert.gauvin" <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>, "robert.mckee" <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, andre <andre@jafaust.com> | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, nouvelle@acadienouvelle.com, Frederic Cammarano <frederic.cammarano@radio-canada.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com> | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
David Amos Content Deactivated Why doesn't Mr Jones consider the NB Power lawsuit against the EUB newsworthy? Court of Appeal File No. 68-23-CA - Judicial Review of Board Decision in Matter 541
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Court of Appeal File No.: 68-23-CA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW BRUNSWICK UNDER SECTION 52(1) OF THE ENERGY AND UTILITIES BOARD ACT, SNB 2006, c. E-9.18, AND RULE 69 OF THE RULES OF COURT, NB REG 82-73 BETWEEN: NEW BRUNSWICK POWER CORPORATION, APPLICANT, - and – NEW BRUNSWICK ENERGY AND UTILITIES BOARD, RESPONDENT. TO: NEW BRUNSWICK COURT OF APPEAL AND TO: New Brunswick Power Corporation, Applicant ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT I hereby acknowledge that on the day of July, 2023, I received the following documents: a) Notice of Application dated July 4, 2023, issued by the Court of Appeal on July 5, 2023; b) Affidavit of Darren Murphy dated July 4, 2023, with Exhibits “A” through “I” attached; and c) Correspondence from the Deputy Registrar of the Court of Appeal dated July 5, 2023. I am a Registered Party who is named at the top of the notice of application why would I be required to seek status? Veritas Vincit David Raymond Amos On 7/5/23, John Furey <JohnFurey@fureylegal.com> wrote:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 1:03 PM
No comments:
Post a Comment