The next step for a community wind turbine project in Wedgeport will be to measure wind speeds and perform more electrical analysis, says Daniel Roscoe, chief operating officer for Scotian WindFields Inc.
“The proposed capacity of the turbine we expect to put on site is just under two megaÂwatts,” he said.
The tower is projected to be approximately 80 metres high, with each blade measuring about 45 metres in length.
The turbine will produce enough electricity to power 500-600 homes, and 100 per cent of the energy will be consumed in the Yarmouth/Wedgeport region.
Scotian WindFields and its partners were amongst others approved recently for Community-Feed-in Tariff ComFIT approvals for renewable energy projects.
Other approved projects are located in Spiddle Hill, Bayswater, Cheticamp and North Preston. These projects are now able to proceed to the next stage of development.
The Wedgeport project is located between Upper Wedgeport and Little River Harbour, just off Black Pond Road.
Scotian WindFields is in the early stages of the multi-year projÂect and is planning to collect data about the nature of the wind regime using a meteorological tower on the site. The study will provide information about the characteristics of the wind and properly site the turbine.
The nearest large wind turbines to WedgeÂport are located at Pubnico Point Wind Farm, near Lower West Pubnico. These turÂbines are about the same height and size as the turbine that Scotian WindFields intends to install near Wedgeport and have been in operation since 2005.
More than 800 Nova Scotian families share in ownership of Scotian WindFields. The company has committed to donate one per cent of the revenue from each project to the surrounding comÂmunity for its chosen community activity or cause. This dividend could be as much as $10,000 annually and could be used for school programs, local scholarships, comÂmunity recreation programs or facilities. The use of proceeds is up to the comÂmunity to decide.
The provincial government has established clear targets for clean energy: 25 per cent of electricity is to be renewable by 2015, with a goal of 40 per cent by 2050.
The ComFIT program is deÂsigned to help the province meet that goal. In order for projects to be eligible, at least 25 citizens from the county in which the turbine will be installed must invest in it.
The province expects 100 megawatts to be produced through the ComFIT, which provides eligible groups an established price per kilowatt-hour for projects producing electricity from renewable resources such as wind, biomass, in-stream tidal and run-of-the-river tidal developments.
Eligible groups include municipalities, First Nations, co-operatives, universities, community economic development funds and not-for-profit groups.
Roscoe says public meetings about the Wedgeport project will be held in the near future and that it is likely the turbine will be installed in 2013.
Vancouver Natural Gas Ban Reversal spotlights energy policy, electrification tradeoffs, heat pumps, emissions, grid reliability, and affordability, reshaping building codes and decarbonization pathways while inviting stakeholders to weigh practical constraints and climate goals.
Key Points
Vancouver ending its ban on natural gas in new homes to balance climate goals with reliability, costs, and technology.
✅ Balances emissions goals with reliability and affordability
✅ Impacts builders, homeowners, and energy infrastructure
✅ Spurs debate on electrification, heat pumps, and grid capacity
In a significant policy shift, Vancouver has decided to lift its ban on natural gas appliances in new homes, a move that marks a pivotal moment in the city's energy policy and environmental strategy. This decision, announced recently and following the city's Clean Energy Champion recognition for Bloedel upgrades, has sparked a broader conversation about the future of energy systems and the balance between environmental goals and practical energy needs. Stewart Muir, CEO of Resource Works, argues that this reversal should catalyze a necessary dialogue on energy choices, highlighting both the benefits and challenges of such a policy change.
Vancouver's original ban on natural gas appliances was part of a broader initiative aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainability, including progress toward phasing out fossil fuels where feasible over time. The city had adopted stringent regulations to encourage the use of electric heat pumps and other low-carbon technologies in new residential buildings. This move was aligned with Vancouver’s ambitious climate goals, which include achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 and significantly cutting down on fossil fuel use.
However, the recent decision to reverse the ban reflects a growing recognition of the complexities involved in transitioning to entirely new energy systems. The city's administration acknowledged that while electric alternatives offer environmental benefits, they also come with challenges that can affect homeowners, builders, and the broader energy infrastructure, including options for bridging the electricity gap with Alberta to enhance regional reliability.
Stewart Muir argues that Vancouver’s policy shift is not just about natural gas appliances but represents a larger conversation about energy system choices and their implications. He suggests that the reversal of the ban provides an opportunity to address key issues related to energy reliability, affordability, and the practicalities of integrating new technologies, including electrified LNG options for industry within the province into existing systems.
One of the primary reasons behind the reversal is the recognition of the practical limitations and costs associated with transitioning to electric-only systems. For many homeowners and builders, natural gas appliances have long been a reliable and cost-effective option. The initial ban on these appliances led to concerns about increased construction costs and potential disruptions for homeowners who were accustomed to natural gas heating and cooking.
In addition to cost considerations, there are concerns about the reliability and efficiency of electric alternatives. Natural gas has been praised for its stable energy supply and efficient performance, especially in colder climates where electric heating systems might struggle to maintain consistent temperatures or fully utilize Site C's electricity under peak demand. By reversing the ban, Vancouver acknowledges that a one-size-fits-all approach may not be suitable for every situation, particularly when considering diverse housing needs and energy demands.
Muir emphasizes that the reversal of the ban should prompt a broader discussion about how to balance environmental goals with practical energy needs. He argues that rather than enforcing a blanket ban on specific technologies, it is crucial to explore a range of solutions that can effectively address climate objectives while accommodating the diverse requirements of different communities and households.
The debate also touches on the role of technological innovation in achieving sustainability goals. As energy technologies continue to evolve, renewable electricity is coming on strong and new solutions and advancements could potentially offer more efficient and environmentally friendly alternatives. The conversation should include exploring these innovations and considering how they can be integrated into existing energy systems to support long-term sustainability.
Moreover, Muir advocates for a more inclusive approach to energy policy that involves engaging various stakeholders, including residents, businesses, and energy experts. A collaborative approach can help identify practical solutions that address both environmental concerns and the realities of everyday energy use.
In the broader context, Vancouver’s decision reflects a growing trend in cities and regions grappling with energy transitions. Many urban centers are evaluating their energy policies and considering adjustments based on new information and emerging technologies. The key is to find a balance that supports climate goals such as 2050 greenhouse gas targets while ensuring that energy systems remain reliable, affordable, and adaptable to changing needs.
As Vancouver moves forward with its revised policy, it will be important to monitor the outcomes and assess the impacts on both the environment and the community. The reversal of the natural gas ban could serve as a case study for other cities facing similar challenges and could provide valuable insights into how to navigate the complexities of energy transitions.
In conclusion, Vancouver’s decision to reverse its ban on natural gas appliances in new homes is a significant development that opens the door for a critical dialogue about energy system choices. Stewart Muir’s call for a broader conversation emphasizes the need to balance environmental ambitions with practical considerations, such as cost, reliability, and technological advancements. As cities continue to navigate their energy futures, finding a pragmatic and inclusive approach will be essential in achieving both sustainability and functionality in energy systems.
UK Energy Price Guarantee Cost forecasts from Cornwall Insight suggest an £89bn bill, tied to wholesale gas prices, OBR projections, and fiscal policy, to shield households amid the cost of living crisis.
Key Points
It is the projected government spend to cap household bills, driven by wholesale gas prices and OBR market forecasts.
✅ Base case: £89bn over two years, per Cornwall Insight
✅ Range: £72bn to £140bn, volatile wholesale gas costs
✅ Excludes 6-month business support estimated at £22bn-£48bn
Liz Truss’s intervention to freeze energy prices for households for two years is expected to cost the government £89bn, according to the first major costing of the policy by the sector’s leading consultancy.
The analysis from Cornwall Insight, seen exclusively by the Guardian, shows the prime minister’s plan to tackle the cost of living crisis could cost as much as £140bn in a worst-case scenario.
Truss announced in early September that the average annual bill for a typical household would be capped at £2,500 to protect consumers from the intensifying cost of living crisis amid high winter energy costs and a scheduled 80% rise in the cap to £3,549.
The ultimate cost of the policy is uncertain as it is highly dependent on the wholesale cost of gas, including UK natural gas prices which have soared since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine put a squeeze on already-volatile international markets. Ballpark projections had put the cost anywhere from £100bn to £150bn.
The Office for Budget Responsibility is expected to give its forecast for the bill when it provides its independent assessment of Kwasi Kwarteng’s medium-term fiscal plan, which the chancellor said on Tuesday would still happen on 23 November despite previous reports that it would be brought forward.
Cornwall Insight analysed projections of wholesale market moves to cost the intervention. In its base case scenario, analysts expect the policy to cost £89bn. That assumes the cost of supporting each household would be just over £1,000 in the first year, and about £2,000 in the second year.
The study’s authors said the wholesale price of gas would be influenced by energy demand, the severity of weather, “geo-political uncertainty” and prices for liquified natural gas as Europe seeks to refill storage facilities, which countries have rushed to fill up this winter but which could be relatively empty by next spring.
In the best-case outcome, the policy would cost £72bn, with some projections pointing to a 16% decrease in energy bills in April for households, while the “extreme high” outlook would see the government shell out £140bn to protect 29m UK households.
Gas prices are expected to push even higher if the Kremlin decides to completely cut off Russian gas exports into Europe.
Cornwall Insight’s projection does not include a separate six-month initiative to cap costs for companies, charities and public sector organisations, which is forecast to cost £22bn to £48bn.
The consultancy’s chief executive, Gareth Miller, said the £70bn range in its forecasts reflected “a febrile wholesale market continuing to be beset by geopolitical instability, sensitivity to demand, weather and infrastructure resilience”.
He said: “Fortune befriends the bold, but it also favours the prepared. The large uncertainties around commodity markets over the next two years means that the government could get lucky with costs coming out at the low end of the range, but the opposite could also be true.
“In each case, the government may find itself passengers to circumstances outside its control, having made policy that is a hostage to surprises, events and volatile factors. That’s a difficult position to be in.”
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. The government has faced criticism, as some British MPs urge tighter limits on prices, that the policy is effectively a “blank cheque” and is not targeted at the most vulnerable in society.
Concerns over how Truss and Kwarteng intend to fund a series of measures, including the price guarantee, have spooked financial markets.
The EU, which has outlined possible gas price cap strategies in recent proposals, said last week it planned to cap the revenues of low-carbon electricity generators at €180 a megawatt hour, which is less than half current market prices. Truss has so far resisted calls to extend a levy on North Sea oil and gas operators to electricity generators, who have benefited from a link between gas and electricity prices in Britain.
Truss hopes to strike voluntary long-term deals with generators including Centrica and EDF, alongside the government’s Energy Security Bill measures, to bring down wholesale prices.
The Financial Times reported on Tuesday that the government has threatened companies with legislation to cap their revenues if voluntary deals cannot be agreed.
Canada Clean Electricity Regulations 2050 balance net-zero goals with grid reliability and affordability, setting emissions caps, enabling offset credits, and flexible provincial pathways, including support for non-grid facilities during the clean energy transition.
Key Points
A federal plan for a net-zero grid by 2050 with emissions caps, offsets, and flexible provincial compliance.
✅ Emissions cap targeting 181 Mt CO2 from the power sector by 2050
✅ Offset credits and annual limits enable compliance flexibility
✅ Support for remote, non-grid facilities and regional pathways
In December 2024, the Government of Canada announced a significant policy shift regarding its clean electricity objectives. The initial target to achieve a net-zero electricity grid by 2035 has been extended to 2050. This decision reflects the government's response to feedback from provinces and energy industry stakeholders, who expressed concerns about the feasibility of meeting the 2035 deadline.
Revised Clean Electricity Regulations
The newly finalized Clean Electricity Regulations (CER) outline the framework for Canada's transition to a net-zero electricity grid by 2050, advancing the goal of 100 per cent clean electricity nationwide.
Emissions Reduction Targets: The regulations set a cap on emissions from the electricity sector, targeting a reduction of 181 megatonnes of CO₂ by 2050. This is a decrease from the previous goal of 342 megatonnes, reflecting a more gradual approach to emissions reduction.
Flexibility Mechanisms: To accommodate the diverse energy landscapes across provinces, the CER introduces flexibility measures. These include annual emissions limits and the option to use offset credits, allowing provinces to tailor their strategies while adhering to national objectives.
Support for Non-Grid Connected Facilities: Recognizing the unique challenges of remote and off-grid communities, the regulations provide accommodations for certain non-grid connected facilities, ensuring that all regions can contribute to the national clean electricity goals.
Implications for Canada's Energy Landscape
The extension of the net-zero electricity target to 2050 signifies a strategic recalibration of Canada's energy policy. This adjustment acknowledges the complexities involved in transitioning to a clean energy future, including:
Grid Modernization: Upgrading the electrical grid to accommodate renewable energy sources and ensure reliability is a critical component of the transition, especially as Ontario's EV wave accelerates across the province.
Economic Considerations: Balancing environmental objectives with economic impacts is essential. The government aims to create over 400,000 clean energy jobs, fostering economic growth while reducing emissions, supported by ambitious EV goals in the transport sector.
Regional Variations: Provinces have diverse energy profiles and resources, and British Columbia's power supply challenges highlight planning constraints. The CER's flexibility mechanisms are designed to accommodate these differences, allowing for tailored approaches that respect regional contexts.
Public and Industry Reactions
The policy shift has elicited varied responses:
Environmental Advocates: Some environmental groups express concern that the extended timeline may delay critical climate action, while debates over Quebec's push for EV dominance underscore policy trade-offs. They emphasize the need for more ambitious targets to address the escalating impacts of climate change.
Industry Stakeholders: The energy sector generally welcomes the extended timeline, viewing it as a pragmatic approach that allows for a more measured transition, particularly amid criticism of the 2035 EV mandate in transportation policy. The flexibility provisions are particularly appreciated, as they provide the necessary leeway to adapt to evolving market and technological conditions.
Looking Forward
As Canada moves forward with the implementation of the Clean Electricity Regulations, the focus will be on:
Monitoring Progress: Establishing robust mechanisms to track emissions reductions and ensure compliance with the new targets.
Stakeholder Engagement: Continuing dialogue with provinces, industry, and communities to refine strategies and address emerging challenges, including coordination on EV sales regulations as complementary measures.
Innovation and Investment: Encouraging the development and deployment of clean energy technologies through incentives and support programs.
The extension of Canada's net-zero electricity target to 2050 represents a strategic adjustment aimed at achieving a balance between environmental goals and practical implementation considerations. The Clean Electricity Regulations provide a framework that accommodates regional differences and industry concerns, setting the stage for a sustainable and economically viable energy future.
Nelson DC Fast-Charging EV Station delivers 50-kilowatt DCFC service at the community complex, expanding EV infrastructure in British Columbia with FortisBC, faster than Level 2 chargers, supporting clean transportation, range confidence, and highway corridor travel.
Key Points
A 50 kW public DC fast charger in Nelson, BC, run by FortisBC, providing rapid EV charging at the community complex.
✅ 50 kW DCFC cuts charge time to about 30 minutes
✅ $9 per half hour session; convenient downtown location
✅ Funded by NRCan, BC government, and FortisBC
FortisBC and the City of Nelson celebrated the opening of Nelson's first publicly available direct current fast-charging (DCFC) electric vehicle (EV) station on Friday.
"Adopting EV's is one of many ways for individuals to reduce carbon emissions," said Mayor John Dooley, City of Nelson. "We hope that the added convenience of this fast-charging station helps grow EV adoption among our community, and we appreciate the support from FortisBC, the province and the federal government."
The new station, located at the Nelson and District Community Complex, provides a convenient and faster charge option right in the heart of the commercial district and makes Nelson more accessible for both local and out-of-town EV drivers. The 50-kilowatt station is expected to bring a compact EV from zero to 80 per cent charged in about a half an hour, as compared to the four Level-2 charging stations located in downtown Nelson that require from three to four hours. The cost for a half hour charge at the new DC fast-charging station is $9 per half hour.
This fast-charging station was made possible through a partnership between FortisBC, the City of Nelson, Nelson Hydro, the Province of British Columbia and Natural Resources Canada. As part of the partnership, the City of Nelson is providing the location and FortisBC will own and manage the station.
This is the latest of 12 fast-charging stations FortisBC has built over the last year with support from municipalities and all levels of government, and adds to the five FortisBC-owned Kootenay stations that were opened as part of the accelerate Kootenays initiative in 2018.
All 12 stations were 50 per cent funded by Natural Resources Canada, 25 per cent by BC Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources and the remaining 25 per cent by FortisBC. The funding is provided by Natural Resources Canada's Electric Vehicle and Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Deployment Initiative, which aims to establish a coast-to-coast network of fast-chargers along the national highway system, natural gas refueling stations along key freight corridors and hydrogen refueling stations in major metropolitan areas. It is part of the Government of Canada's more than $180-billion Investing in Canada infrastructure plan. The Government of British Columbia is also contributing $300,000 towards the fast-chargers through its Clean Energy Vehicle Public Fast Charging Program.
This station brings the total DCFC chargers FortisBC owns and operates to 17 stations across 14 communities in the southern interior. FortisBC continues to look for opportunities to expand this network as part of its 30BY30 goal of reducing emissions from its customers by 30 per cent by 2030. For more information about the FortisBC electric vehicle fast-charging network, visit: fortisbc.com/electricvehicle.
"Electric vehicles play a key role in building a cleaner future. We are pleased to work with partners like FortisBC and the City of Nelson to give Canadians greener options to drive where they need to go, " said The Honourable Seamus O'Regan, Canada's Minister of Natural Resources.
"Nelson's first public fast-charging EV station increases EV infrastructure in the city, making it easier than ever to make the switch to cleaner transportation. Along with a range of rebates and financial incentives available to EV drivers, it is now more convenient and affordable to go electric and this station is a welcome addition to our EV charging infrastructure," said Michelle Mungall, BC's Minister of Jobs, Economic Development and Competitiveness, and MLA for Nelson Creston.
"Building the necessary DC fast-charging infrastructure, such as the Lillooet fast-charging site in British Columbia, close to highways and local amenities where drivers need them most is a critical step in growing electric vehicle adoption. Collaborations like this are proving to be an effective way to achieve this, and I'd like to thank all the program partners for their commitment in opening this important station, " said Mark Warren, Director of Business Innovation, FortisBC.
ITER Nuclear Fusion advances tokamak magnetic confinement, heating deuterium-tritium plasma with superconducting magnets, targeting net energy gain, tritium breeding, and steam-turbine power, while complementing laser inertial confinement milestones for grid-scale electricity and 2025 startup goals.
Key Points
ITER Nuclear Fusion is a tokamak project confining D-T plasma with magnets to achieve net energy gain and clean power.
✅ Tokamak magnetic confinement with high-temp superconducting coils
✅ Deuterium-tritium fuel cycle with on-site tritium breeding
✅ Targets net energy gain and grid-scale, low-carbon electricity
It sounds like the stuff of dreams: a virtually limitless source of energy that doesn’t produce greenhouse gases or radioactive waste. That’s the promise of nuclear fusion, often described as the holy grail of clean energy by proponents, which for decades has been nothing more than a fantasy due to insurmountable technical challenges. But things are heating up in what has turned into a race to create what amounts to an artificial sun here on Earth, one that can provide power for our kettles, cars and light bulbs.
Today’s nuclear power plants create electricity through nuclear fission, in which atoms are split, with next-gen nuclear power exploring smaller, cheaper, safer designs that remain distinct from fusion. Nuclear fusion however, involves combining atomic nuclei to release energy. It’s the same reaction that’s taking place at the Sun’s core. But overcoming the natural repulsion between atomic nuclei and maintaining the right conditions for fusion to occur isn’t straightforward. And doing so in a way that produces more energy than the reaction consumes has been beyond the grasp of the finest minds in physics for decades.
But perhaps not for much longer. Some major technical challenges have been overcome in the past few years and governments around the world have been pouring money into fusion power research as part of a broader green industrial revolution under way in several regions. There are also over 20 private ventures in the UK, US, Europe, China and Australia vying to be the first to make fusion energy production a reality.
“People are saying, ‘If it really is the ultimate solution, let’s find out whether it works or not,’” says Dr Tim Luce, head of science and operation at the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), being built in southeast France. ITER is the biggest throw of the fusion dice yet.
Its $22bn (£15.9bn) build cost is being met by the governments of two-thirds of the world’s population, including the EU, the US, China and Russia, at a time when Europe is losing nuclear power and needs energy, and when it’s fired up in 2025 it’ll be the world’s largest fusion reactor. If it works, ITER will transform fusion power from being the stuff of dreams into a viable energy source.
Constructing a nuclear fusion reactor ITER will be a tokamak reactor – thought to be the best hope for fusion power. Inside a tokamak, a gas, often a hydrogen isotope called deuterium, is subjected to intense heat and pressure, forcing electrons out of the atoms. This creates a plasma – a superheated, ionised gas – that has to be contained by intense magnetic fields.
The containment is vital, as no material on Earth could withstand the intense heat (100,000,000°C and above) that the plasma has to reach so that fusion can begin. It’s close to 10 times the heat at the Sun’s core, and temperatures like that are needed in a tokamak because the gravitational pressure within the Sun can’t be recreated.
When atomic nuclei do start to fuse, vast amounts of energy are released. While the experimental reactors currently in operation release that energy as heat, in a fusion reactor power plant, the heat would be used to produce steam that would drive turbines to generate electricity, even as some envision nuclear beyond electricity for industrial heat and fuels.
Tokamaks aren’t the only fusion reactors being tried. Another type of reactor uses lasers to heat and compress a hydrogen fuel to initiate fusion. In August 2021, one such device at the National Ignition Facility, at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, generated 1.35 megajoules of energy. This record-breaking figure brings fusion power a step closer to net energy gain, but most hopes are still pinned on tokamak reactors rather than lasers.
In June 2021, China’s Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST) reactor maintained a plasma for 101 seconds at 120,000,000°C. Before that, the record was 20 seconds. Ultimately, a fusion reactor would need to sustain the plasma indefinitely – or at least for eight-hour ‘pulses’ during periods of peak electricity demand.
A real game-changer for tokamaks has been the magnets used to produce the magnetic field. “We know how to make magnets that generate a very high magnetic field from copper or other kinds of metal, but you would pay a fortune for the electricity. It wouldn’t be a net energy gain from the plant,” says Luce.
One route for nuclear fusion is to use atoms of deuterium and tritium, both isotopes of hydrogen. They fuse under incredible heat and pressure, and the resulting products release energy as heat
The solution is to use high-temperature, superconducting magnets made from superconducting wire, or ‘tape’, that has no electrical resistance. These magnets can create intense magnetic fields and don’t lose energy as heat.
“High temperature superconductivity has been known about for 35 years. But the manufacturing capability to make tape in the lengths that would be required to make a reasonable fusion coil has just recently been developed,” says Luce. One of ITER’s magnets, the central solenoid, will produce a field of 13 tesla – 280,000 times Earth’s magnetic field.
The inner walls of ITER’s vacuum vessel, where the fusion will occur, will be lined with beryllium, a metal that won’t contaminate the plasma much if they touch. At the bottom is the divertor that will keep the temperature inside the reactor under control.
“The heat load on the divertor can be as large as in a rocket nozzle,” says Luce. “Rocket nozzles work because you can get into orbit within minutes and in space it’s really cold.” In a fusion reactor, a divertor would need to withstand this heat indefinitely and at ITER they’ll be testing one made out of tungsten.
Meanwhile, in the US, the National Spherical Torus Experiment – Upgrade (NSTX-U) fusion reactor will be fired up in the autumn of 2022, while efforts in advanced fission such as a mini-reactor design are also progressing. One of its priorities will be to see whether lining the reactor with lithium helps to keep the plasma stable.
Choosing a fuel Instead of just using deuterium as the fusion fuel, ITER will use deuterium mixed with tritium, another hydrogen isotope. The deuterium-tritium blend offers the best chance of getting significantly more power out than is put in. Proponents of fusion power say one reason the technology is safe is that the fuel needs to be constantly fed into the reactor to keep fusion happening, making a runaway reaction impossible.
Deuterium can be extracted from seawater, so there’s a virtually limitless supply of it. But only 20kg of tritium are thought to exist worldwide, so fusion power plants will have to produce it (ITER will develop technology to ‘breed’ tritium). While some radioactive waste will be produced in a fusion plant, it’ll have a lifetime of around 100 years, rather than the thousands of years from fission.
At the time of writing in September, researchers at the Joint European Torus (JET) fusion reactor in Oxfordshire were due to start their deuterium-tritium fusion reactions. “JET will help ITER prepare a choice of machine parameters to optimise the fusion power,” says Dr Joelle Mailloux, one of the scientific programme leaders at JET. These parameters will include finding the best combination of deuterium and tritium, and establishing how the current is increased in the magnets before fusion starts.
The groundwork laid down at JET should accelerate ITER’s efforts to accomplish net energy gain. ITER will produce ‘first plasma’ in December 2025 and be cranked up to full power over the following decade. Its plasma temperature will reach 150,000,000°C and its target is to produce 500 megawatts of fusion power for every 50 megawatts of input heating power.
“If ITER is successful, it’ll eliminate most, if not all, doubts about the science and liberate money for technology development,” says Luce. That technology development will be demonstration fusion power plants that actually produce electricity, where advanced reactors can build on decades of expertise. “ITER is opening the door and saying, yeah, this works – the science is there.”
BC Hydro electricity demand decline reflects COVID-19 impacts across British Columbia, with reduced industrial load, full reservoirs, strategic spilling, and potential rate increases, as hydropower plants adjust operations at Seven Mile, Revelstoke, and Site C.
Key Points
A 10% COVID-19-driven drop in BC power use, prompting reservoir spilling, plant curtailment, and potential rate hikes.
✅ 10% load drop; industrial demand down 7% since mid-March
✅ Reservoirs near capacity; controlled spilling to mitigate risk
✅ Possible rate hikes; Site C construction continues
Elecricity demand is down 10 per cent across British Columbia, an unprecedented decline in commercial electricity consumption sparked by the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a BC Hydro report.
Power demand across hotels, offices, recreational facilities and restaurants have dwindled as British Columbians self isolate, and bill relief for residents and businesses was introduced during this period.
The shortfall means there's a surplus of water in reservoirs across the province.
"This drop in load in addition to the spring snow melt is causing our reservoirs to reach near capacity, which could lead to environmental concerns, as well as public safety risks if we don't address the challenges now," said spokesperson Tanya Fish.
Crews will have to strategically spill reservoirs to keep them from overflowing, a process that can have negative impacts on downstream ecosystems. Excessive spilling can increase fish mortality rates.
Spilling is currently underway at the Seven Mile and Revelstoke reservoirs. In addition, several small plants have been shut down.
Site C and hydro rates According to the report, titled Demand Dilemma, the decline could continue into April 2021 and drop by another two per cent, even as a regulator report alleged BC Hydro misled oversight bodies.
Major industry — forestry, mining and oil and gas — accounts for about 30 per cent of BC Hydro's overall electricity load. Energy demand from these customers has dropped by seven per cent since mid-March, while in Manitoba a Consumers Coalition has urged rejection of proposed rate increases.
BC Hydro says a prolonged drop in demand could have an impact on future rates, which could potentially go up as the power provider looks to recoup deferred operating costs and financial losses.
In Manitoba, Manitoba Hydro's debt has grown significantly, underscoring the financial risks utilities face during demand shocks.
Fish said the crown corporation still expects there to be increased demand in the long-term. She said construction of the Site C Dam is continuing as planned to support clean-energy generation in the province. There are currently nearly 1,000 workers on-site.
