25 comments on Anaerobic Digestion (AD) in Ontario – A Regulatory Obstacle Course
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
User login
Archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
Dams are a hot potato.
First of course you have the movement of fish, which is blocked.
And second you have the impact on everyone downstream. Riparian Rights is the legal doctrine.
And then you have the liability issues if the dam fails, or does something wrong.
Having been peripherally involved in dam litigation, it can go on for years.
Adding a power plant to an existing dam raises none of the above issues, yet it still creates massive paperwork headaches in the US ! Likewise for "run-of-river" schemes except for the riparian issues for that section of river bypassed.
I have heard it said that any hydropower plant under 5 MW in the US cannot afford to pay for it's paperwork. And excuse used in Yosemite Park for an 1890s waterwheel. 2 MW of historic generation equipment dumped in a landfill, wheel left for visual impact & "history". It now just spins uselessly. Zero impact on stream, but less paperwork.
Best Hopes for Less paperwork,
Alan
National Park Service did this just before California electricity crisis.
This is a very important point Alan. In fact it really can't be stressed strongly enough. There is a substantial gap, in terms of project size, for renewable energy, where projects are currently being rendered non-viable purely by regulatory barriers to entry. The issues are not technical - they are purely political.
Small systems (50kW and below) are feasible here, if they are associated with a comparable load, because they can set up a net-metering arrangement fairly easily and cheaply. Above that size the regulatory burden (and it's associated cost) is completely disproportionate for projects below a certain minimum size, a size which would vary by jurisdiction and by renewable energy technology. Unfortunately, the gap is where most of the community or farm-based initiatives would fall.
I'm tempted to write another post specifically on this issue, but I'd have to do a lot of research first. I'm also planning to write something on islanding.
By the way, did you hear that the planned Ottawa electrified light rail scheme was derailed by political interference? It might be reconsidered as the jilted construction company is threatening to claim damages against the city for breach of contract, but everything is still up in the air at the moment.
For small hydro, I would STRONGLY recommend MhyLab at
http://www.mhylab.com/fr/index.html
High quality & innovative designs that can be built in small machine shops (CNC capability required).
Smallest they have ever done was 100 watts; largest 1 MW (limit as a non-profit so as to not compete with commerical firms).
Yes, I have been following Ottawa. (I supported the subway section in downtown but I understood & respected both positions). STUPID is about as kind a remark as I can make for recent developments.
Best Hopes,
Alan