Editor,
I write in response to a letter you published on June 5, from Mr. Mikkelsen of TC Energy. He has been using your ‘Opinion’ section for the past 6 years to promote the virtues of TC Energy’s proposed Pumped Storage Project (PSP) to be built atop the Niagara Escarpment in Meaford.
During this 6 year period, no “much needed” storage capacity has been created. Should the project proceed, let’s assume in one year from now, there still would be no storage capacity from PSP until at least 2035. Also during this period, the cost of this PSP continues to escalate, whereas its energy capture efficiency will remain stagnant. The cost of the alternate technology (rapidly evolving battery storage) continues to decrease due to mass production and to innovation.
As it stands today, the projected cost of a 1,000 mW PSP will be at least $10 billion. A 1,000 mW battery storage complex (BSC) is now down to $4 billion, and decreasing. If a decision was made in the same 1 year period to proceed with a BSC, the 1,000 mW storage capacity would be online 7 years sooner in 2028.
We must also consider other realities of PSP vs. BSC.
- A BSC can be constructed on less than 50 acres of land anywhere adjacent to an Ontario high voltage trunk, without destruction of our Unesco World Heritage escarpment and without untold damages to the aquatic Georgian Bay environment.
- A BSC requires no high voltage energy corridor creation between Barrie and Meaford.
- A BSC has an energy capture efficiency of 90%. PSP will be 67% efficient. This means the PSP will create 450,000 kW of waste heat during regeneration. The BSC number will be closer to one quarter of this at 110,000 kW. For 50+ years!
- A BSC can instantly switch from charge to discharge cycle responding to sporadic generations from wind and solar farms, and to variations in consumer demands. PSP cannot.
- Construction of PSP will create at least 250,000 tons of CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels.
- Unlike the PSP, the BSC would not be burdened by the neverending comprehensive regulatory process because it does not put at risk the environment, the values of resident’s homes, noise and air pollution certainties.
I spent half my 40-year Electrical Engineering career designing and building hydro-electric dams and water storage facilities internationally. I can confirm Hydro powered generation is the cleanest, most efficient from of energy harvesting, when the energy source comes from a river! Pumping water uphill for regeneration is grossly inefficient and has no advantage over current rechargeable battery systems.
TC Energy would be well advised to find a river in Ontario to pursue their ‘Clean Energy’ aspirations. PSP is not clean. Their staff members with science degrees should know better than to use false narratives and to have more respect for members of society who have not had the benefit of an education in the sciences.
On behalf of Ontario Taxpayers and Ratepayers, I request, in fact I Demand, Mr. Mikkelsen return to this ‘Opinion’ section he likes to use, and to take this opportunity to list the advantages of his PSP over battery storage technology. Tell us why we should believe his tenacious rhetoric and why we should all endorse his technology which has already found itself in the dustbin of history.
I’ll give TC Energy kudos for deceiving the government into parting with $285 million to support this sole-sourced, noncompetitive mistake. A government official once told me, “People will believe anything if you keep on stating the same story on a continuous basis,” and this is when Tenacity is Unbecoming.
Stephen Carr, Meaford
