-----Original Message-----
From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@informer2.cis.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@informer2.cis.McMaster.CA] On Behalf Of Dukelow, James S Jr
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:26 PM
To: 'Rouben, Ben'; mclis_post (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] Canadians 'ignorant' of energy factsI think we have a serious case of "read the question before you answer" here.The National Post article said:"In reality, only about 7% of Canada's energy comes from hydro-electric
generation. According to the federal government, 41% of Canada's power
comes from natural gas, 30% from oil, 12% from coal, 6% from nuclear
power and 4% from renewable sources such as wind and solar power."Everyone on this list, except Morgan Brown, seems to be talking about electricity. Do your cars roll and planes fly on electricity? Are your homes heated by electricity?If you take electricity's fraction of total energy usage into account, 6% for nuclear looks about right.Best regards.Jim DukelowPacific Northwest National LaboratoryRichland, WAThese comments are mine and have not been reviewed and/or approved by my management or by the U.S. Department of Energy.-----Original Message-----
From: Rouben, Ben [mailto:roubenb@aecl.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 7:16 PM
To: mclis_post (E-mail)
Subject: FW: [cdn-nucl-l] Canadians 'ignorant' of energy factsTo my knowledge nuclear-generated electricity has been ~16-17% of all electricity generated in Canada (in recent years).Benjamin Rouben, FCNS
Manager, Reactor Core Physics
AECL Sheridan Park
Tel: 905-823-9060 x 4550
Fax: 905-822-0567
e-mail: roubenb@aecl.ca <mailto:roubenb@aecl.ca>
Cell: 905-302-2054-----Original Message-----
From: English, Michael [mailto:englishm@aecl.ca]
Sent: 2002/mm/24 5:36 PM
To: Canadian Nuclear Discussion List
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] Canadians 'ignorant' of energy factsI can't imagine that the Post doesn't have their facts straight, which leaves me a little confused on this topic...It's my understanding (and Jeremy Whitlock's as well apparently) that nuclear power doesn't account for 6%, or even 7%, of electricity generation in Canada, but that it accounts for 14% (at least it did in 1997) - see Canadian Nuclear FAQ, point B.2Has the contribution made by nuclear really gone down by half? Has there been another whole bunch of capacity come online in the last 5 years that would lower nuclear's contribution? Anyone have any thoughts on this?Mike-----Original Message-----
From: Brown, Morgan [mailto:brownmj@aecl.ca]
Sent: Tuesday September 24, 2002 4:48 PM
To: Canadian Nuclear Discussion List
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] Canadians 'ignorant' of energy factsIn 1999, according to the Energy Statistics Handbook of Natural Resources Canada, Canada consumed the following primary energy in petajoules
Oil 5420 (35.5%)
Nat gas 6189 (40.5%)
Coal 1589 (10.4%)
Nuclear 250 (1.6%)
Hydroelectricity 1232 (8.1%)
Other 609 (4.0%)The problem with the above is that it's hard to convert from primary energy to useful energy. 250 PJ of nuclear energy is equivalent to 69,500,000 MWh, which is what Canadian reactors delivered to the grids in 1999 (i.e. net electricity). That is easy to compare to hydroelectricity. But coal includes steel making, and natural gas includes heating, as does oil. And then there is automotive use. All complex to convert to a basic primary consumption.
By comparison (BP Amoco Statistical Review of World Energy), in 1999 Canada consumed the following primary energy in Millions of Tonnes of Oil Equivalent:
Oil 83.0
Nat gas 64.3
Coal 31.9
Nuclear 19.0
Hydroelectricity 29.6
(they don't list "other")Note that hydro is only 1.56 times that of nuclear as opposed to 4.93 in the NRCan report. This is what I would expect from comparing hydro and nuclear electricity generated in that year. It appears that the BP Amoco numbers include ALL the thermal heat generated (and lost) by the energy sources, whereas the NRCan numbers may be in terms of useful final energy.
Note, however, that the National Post article said :
"In reality, only about 7% of Canada's energy comes from hydro-electric
generation. According to the federal government, 41% of Canada's power
comes from natural gas, 30% from oil, 12% from coal, 6% from nuclear
power and 4% from renewable sources such as wind and solar power."The "renewable" sector is by almost entirely wood - pulp liquor and wood chips being burned. Wind and solar would contribute very little.
- Morgan
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam McLean [mailto:adam.mclean@utoronto.ca]
Sent: Tuesday September 24, 2002 1:09 AM
To: Canadian Nuclear Discussion List
Subject: [cdn-nucl-l] Canadians 'ignorant' of energy facts
Posted in the National Post on September 16, 2002 and at:
www.nationalpost.com/search/site/story.asp?id=39787A0A-8ACC-4666-8E39-29
8354C51DB8
Just a single mention of nuclear but interesting results from the
poll...Adam
---------------
Canadians 'ignorant' of energy facts
Government polls: Lack of knowledge may hamper efforts to cut
consumption
Bill Curry
National PostMonday, September 16, 2002
ADVERTISEMENT
OTTAWA - Canadians are either "ignorant" or "in denial" about how the
energy they use is produced, with 78% thinking it comes from relatively
clean hydro-electric power.The figure comes from one of three new government polls that found
Canadians are unaware of government programs set up to reduce energy
consumption and have little interest in the issue overall.In reality, only about 7% of Canada's energy comes from hydro-electric
generation. According to the federal government, 41% of Canada's power
comes from natural gas, 30% from oil, 12% from coal, 6% from nuclear
power and 4% from renewable sources such as wind and solar power.The recent public opinion studies show the government faces an uphill
battle with Canadians as it attempts to reduce energy consumption in
order to meet Canada's commitments under the Kyoto protocol. Jean
Chrétien, the Prime Minister, has announced that Parliament will vote on
ratifying the international agreement, which would commit Canada to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions significantly.Mr. Chrétien has since suggested however, that the government may strive
for lower reduction targets than are actually in the agreement.Regardless of the targets, reducing greenhouse gas emissions is an
increasing priority for the government. But according to a recent
government poll, Canadians continue to have a poor understanding of
energy issues and are not really concerned about consumption.The survey of 1,502 adult Canadians was conducted in February and March
of this year. It found Canadians are more likely to be concerned about
the cost of energy, with 41% saying they are "very concerned." The
number is higher than those who say they are very concerned about
environmental damage from energy production (31%) or damage from energy
use (31%). In all three categories, Canadians are slightly less
concerned than they were in a similar poll in 1993.The survey was conducted by Decima Research for Natural Resources Canada
and is a follow-up to similar polls in 1997 and 1993.Among the most significant changes in opinion since 1997 is the growing
number of Canadians who feel the government should introduce tax
incentives to promote a reduction in energy consumption. It is now the
favoured option of 29%, ahead of all other options, such as education
campaigns (27%), further scientific research to improve energy
efficiency (19%) or tougher appliance standards (17%). While Canadians
are divided on the means of encouraging more environmentally friendly
behaviour, 84% continue to believe the government should take an active
role in promoting energy conservation among consumers.The study shows an increasing concern about the supply of energy, with
23% saying they are very concerned, a 7% jump from 1993. According to
Decima's analysis, the concern may be fuelled in part by the emerging
issue of exporting Canadian energy to the U.S., with close to half (46%)
saying they are very concerned about that issue, primarily in Ontario
and Western Canada. Most Canadians said environmental damage is caused
primarily by vehicle use and factories as opposed to consuming
electricity."This can be explained, at least in part, by the fact that many
Canadians do not understand how their electricity is generated, with
most (78%) holding the belief that their homes are powered by relatively
'clean' hydro-electric power," states the report. "Whether this is a
function of ignorance or denial, it is clear that, unlike vehicle
pollution, the environmental consequences of electric power generation
have not yet been firmly established in the public's consciousness."The survey recommends the department address the public's declining view
of the resource sector's contribution to the economy and increase
awareness of the federal government's role in promoting science and
technology.It also suggests the government continue to focus on increasing
Canadians' awareness of energy issues, especially the impacts of their
own consumption.According to two other recently released public opinion reports prepared
for Natural Resources Canada, Canadians are not aware of government
programs to raise awareness of energy consumption.A May 31 report summarizing six focus groups made up of elementary
school teachers and students found very few had heard of a teaching kit
called "The Calendar Club" created by the Office of Energy Efficiency at
Natural Resources Canada.In June, the Office of Energy Efficiency received another focus group
study that found very limited knowledge of the government's "Energy
Star" program, which places stickers on appliances that meet government
standards for energy efficiency."Generally, energy efficiency was not a top-level purchase factor, nor
an important one," the report found. Focus group participants said that
when buying an appliance, they were more concerned about price, quality,
features, brand name, reliability, warranty and after-purchase delivery."Understanding of energy efficiency as a concept was poor," it states.
When asked about the advantages of using energy-efficient products, the
participants said they would save money in the long-term, but "not big
savings." They also stated it would "help the environment -- but most
are not sure how, except that 'future generations' would somehow
benefit."bcurry@nationalpost.com
© Copyright 2002 National Post
_______________________________________________
cdn-nucl-l mailing list
cdn-nucl-l@mailman.McMaster.CA
http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/cdn-nucl-l