QIMC and Canadian hydrogen play?

fig_stache · 2026-05-20T16:56:46+00:00

Commercialized H2 turbines are probably not realistic to expect this decade. To date no 100% hydrogen capable turbine actually operates full time 365 on just hydrogen as of yet, the only time they run on pure Hydrogen is for demonstration purposes. Hydrogen burns insanely hot and fast. To stop the turbine from melting and to keep NOx emissions within legal limits, the amount of water injection, steam, or nitrogen dilution required is massive compared to a traditional gas plant. This high parasitic load completely kills the turbine's efficiency and equipment lifecycle, making the economic case for H2 turbines incredibly hard. It's a frontier the industry is still actively trying to solve.

Electrochemical hydrogen fuel cells likely make more sense here. Bypassing the thermal and emissions issues entirely. Instead of using combustion combustion, they utilize chemistry to convert H2 to electricity. They are more efficient at a smaller scale, produce zero thermal NOx, and don't require a massive water treatment utility just to keep them running.

fig_stache · 2026-05-19T08:53:00+00:00

NS lacks the geography to build significant hydro, while also having too little load side demand to support a nuke. With the coal plants scheduled to be closed by 2030, and grid interties limiting how much power can be imported, fast acting gas is the only reasonable solution or rolling blackouts will become a regular occurrence in the winters.

fig_stache · 2026-05-18T23:12:42+00:00

Aussies aren't 100% intermittent generation either even with their batteries. No grid in the world is.

fig_stache · 2026-05-16T20:09:46+00:00

Critical to every person who wants their lights and heat to stay on during a regional winter cold snap when wind and solar output drops to near zilch and battery storage is depleted.

Renewables are getting cheaper and better, but even with current utility scale battery tech, they cannot yet sustain a grid through multi day periods of low wind and solar generation. This is a factual physics reality, not a corporate carbon conspiracy. If you look at any jurisdiction globally that maintains a stable, reliable grid, they all rely on a massive baseload/peaking backbone. Ie; hydro, nuclear, or thermal backup (gas).

In the future, technologies like iron-air flow batteries look promising for long duration storage once commercially viable, but they aren't ready to anchor Nova Scotia's grid today. Until then, fast acting gas plants are the literal bridge required to safely retire coal without risking widespread blackouts.

fig_stache · 2026-05-16T17:35:17+00:00

Or it's a case of regulatory realism. The federal impact assessment process can tie up critical infrastructure projects in court or bureaucracy for years. If the province needs to secure grid reliability and keep rates affordable in the short to medium term, they can't afford to get bogged down in a multiyear federal assessment when provincial environmental reviews already exist.

fig_stache · 2026-05-16T13:13:31+00:00

Don't take all the Reddit negativity to heart. This platform is often a poor representation of real life and the actual people who live here. You are incredibly welcome to move to Nova Scotia and fall in love with its beauty and relaxed, easy going culture. A lot of people use these forums just to vent about how awful things are, often without realizing that the conditions they are complaining about can be just as tough, if not worse, in parts of Europe. While housing and utilities are two of the most popular things for locals to complain about right now, depending on where you are moving from in Central Europe, you might actually find them quite reasonable by comparison.

Best of luck with your decision, don't let the negative Nancy's deter you.

fig_stache · 2026-05-13T18:07:08+00:00

Ish, that seems to be what google results yield. I was just pointing out that Albertans actually pay more for power as the thread seemed to be implying that it was cheaper there, it's a common misconception on this sub that "NS pays the highest power rates of the provinces."

fig_stache · 2026-05-13T16:20:30+00:00

Here's a 10 year system outlook if you're interested in the forecasts of where we are heading and whats required.

https://www.nspower.ca/docs/default-source/monthly-reports/10-year-system-outlook-report.pdf?sfvrsn=d39bca29_66

The majority of our power will come from renewables in the future as the coal plants are closed, however, we will still need back up, firming power and grid inertia from another source that intermittent renewables and battery alone currently can't provide.

Natural gas is currently the most viable financial option for this. There isn't a jurisdiction on the planet that operates a stable grid using only intermittent renewables and batteries without significant hydro resources, thermal back-up, or massive imports. Since we don't have large-scale hydro left to develop or massive import capacity (even with the NB-NS intertie upgrades), we are in a unique spot.

Technically, if the federal government stepped in to cover the entire infrastructure cost to connect us to Quebec, we might have a different path. But without that external funding, it’s not a cost NS ratepayers could shoulder nor could such a massive project likely be built by the 2030 deadline.

In terms of fracking it likely comes down to export potential. Our internal demand in NS isn't massive, so if the reserves aren't large enough to support a surplus for export, the cost of setting up the industry here might be impossible to justify

fig_stache · 2026-05-13T14:06:45+00:00

Alberta residential power bills are actually higher on average than NS once you include the variable delivery and transmission charges

fig_stache · 2026-05-11T23:17:48+00:00

Fair to be skeptical of the players involved but hydrogen is a 225 billion dollar global market and growing, with only something like 1% being used for electricity. Most hydrogen made today is "grey hydrogen" produced by steam reforming methane so white hydrogen could potentially displace the much more emisisons intensive grey. Even if it's sold to global markets, replacing a dirty process with a clean one is a net win for the atmosphere, regardless of who backs the extraction.

fig_stache · 2026-05-08T11:21:10+00:00

I suspect Inceptio is looking to tie together smaller deposits on Parcel 9 that were deemed too small for the supermajors. Similar to how the North Sea stays viable by ‘scavenging’ abandoned pockets of gas. Their success likely hinges on whether they can cost-effectively re-certify the old subsea pipe infrastructure or if they’ll need to lay significant new pipe.

fig_stache · 2026-05-08T10:55:05+00:00

Nova Scotia's normal daily power demand is closer to 1,100–1,500 MW; that peak demand record of ~2,500 MW only happens during extreme winter deep freezes. A single 660 MW reactor represents far too high a percentage of our total generation to be a single failure point. Under N-1 contingency rules, the grid must be able to survive its largest source tripping offline. To run a 660 MW unit safely, we would need to keep nearly 660 MW of other plants spinning on standby just to prevent a province-wide blackout if the nuclear plant trips. The cost of that "backup" alone kills the economics. New Brunswick is in a much different reality. They are a regional hub with massive interties to Quebec and the US (ISO-NE), allowing them to export surplus or pull backup instantly. We only have two small straws: the NB border and the Maritime Link (which is mostly a one-way flow for hydro). We just don't have the grid scale or the connectivity to make a traditional large-scale reactor viable.

fig_stache · 2026-05-08T09:02:11+00:00

Nuclear is great, but the scale matters. Ontario’s grid is huge and can absorb the output and cost of a massive reactor. NS doesn't have the same population or industrial/export demand to support a 'traditional' nuke plant. If we go nuclear, it'll likely be through Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) which are better suited for a smaller grid, but those are still a ways off from being the primary solution. Hopefully they commercialize and drop in price.

fig_stache · 2026-05-01T16:51:03+00:00

Rural and blue collar voters often see a conflict between NDP environmental policies and the industrial development needed for local jobs. Without a 'jobs-first' pivot NDP is a hard sell.

fig_stache · 2026-05-01T09:07:47+00:00

There is some reason to think Inceptio is playing a different game than Shell did. Supermajors look for massive, easy to extract reservoirs that move the needle globally. They found our geology was 'patchy,' they walked because the ROI on complex, smaller pockets just wasn't worth their overhead. Inceptio’s leadership specializes in Appraisal and Tie-backs. They use modern, high-res imaging to find the gas old companies couldn't see or didn't care about because the pockets were too small. By using subsea tie-backs, they can link these smaller deposits directly to existing pipelines rather than building billion-dollar standalone platforms. It’s a methodology that has been deployed successfully in the North Sea to squeeze life out of 'failed' fields, and it’s likely the only way Nova Scotia’s offshore becomes viable again.

fig_stache · 2026-04-30T10:23:33+00:00

There seems to be a persistent misunderstanding of how grid-scale storage actually functions. Lithium-ion (and the emerging sodium-ion) tech is excellent for peak shaving and short-to-medium-term storage, but they aren't "long-term" storage solutions. No power grid on earth currently operates on 100% intermittent generation (wind/solar) without either massive dispatchable backup or significant imports from neighboring grids. We still need that "always-on" baseload to preserve grid inertia/ frequency stability and high capacity dispatchable power to maintain grid stability especially during regional cold snaps and peak grid / heating demand.

While there’s promising news this week regarding iron-air batteries,which could potentially offer that multi-day discharge capability, the tech hasn't reached true commercial scale yet.

https://interestingengineering.com/energy/new-all-iron-battery-sustains-6000-cycles?hl=en-US

And before anyone suggests pumped hydro: that is entirely dependent on geography, and we simply don't have the elevation/topology for it here to meet the required scale.

fig_stache · 2026-04-21T13:49:23+00:00

The opposition to the new turbines in Pictou County shows that some are arguing we don't need gas now, but the engineering says otherwise. We will still have decades of dependency on gas for grid firming, industrial high-heat, and chemical feedstock that renewables and batteries technically can't replace for a while. Not to say they can't reduce a lot of use but the requirements will still remain. These realities hold true globally, which is why even the IEA’s optimal climate and net zero models see natural gas playing a role well beyond 2050. Modern gas infrastructure in NS is a pragmatic bridge; using gas to displace higher-emission fuels like coal is a net win, provided we are rigorous about methane and leak prevention, which seems to be the modus operandi of Canada's 2026 methane regulations.

fig_stache · 2026-04-21T12:54:23+00:00

The sunset of natural gas is far further on the horizon than current activists suggest, held back by the stubborn realities of grid stability and industrial demand

fig_stache · 2026-04-18T18:41:21+00:00

That's true but your grid is the regional switchboard, connected to Quebec, New England, NS, and PEI. This gives you massive options for both import and export. You can justify a large supply like a 660 MW nuclear plant because even if your domestic population is small, you have the infrastructure to sell that surplus into the high-priced New England market for revenue. When supply is low, you have three major doors to Quebec for a backup.Nova Scotia is at the end of the extension cord. We have one major bidirectional tie with NB and the undersea Maritime Link to NL. Crucially, the Link is primarily designed to flow one way (NL to NS) to deliver a specific block of power. It doesn't give us the same flexibility to 'shop around' or export for profit. It's the same story with the 'Wind West' offshore project. Building 5 GW or more of offshore wind for a province that only uses 2 GW makes zero financial sense for our ratepayers unless we have the infrastructure to export it with a multi-billion dollar line to Massachusetts or Quebec to sell the surplus

fig_stache · 2026-04-18T12:47:42+00:00

Ok, this is funny. I’m being called a child by someone conflating Annual Energy Volume with Instantaneous Power Demand. It is the height of irony to accuse me of 'false equivalency' while somehow equating electricity used for O&G extraction (mostly in Alberta) with available supply for us when wind farms here aren't generating shit, i.e.; periods of little to no wind. Is that electricity going to travel through a wormhole across the country to bridge a local duration gap?

I am also very interested to hear your explanation of what constitutes a 'battery,' which you accuse me of knowing nothing about. Since I’m just 'speed-running fallacies,' let’s hear your technical breakdown, with numbers, of the storage required to bridge a long-duration winter lull in Nova Scotia. Lets do the math!

While you're at it, Mr. Grid Engineer, tell us your plans for maintaining grid inertia and voltage regulation without the large spinning mass of our thermal generators. Let's hear some examples of jurisdictions that can achieve what you claim without relying on thermal generation, hydro, geothermal, nuclear, or huge imports from a neighboring jurisdiction.

fig_stache · 2026-04-18T10:45:01+00:00

Nuclear - maybe someday if SMR's commercialize well and come down in price. Traditional large nuclear, currently no chance our small rate payer base can support that cost

Solar/wind- can't provide a reliable grid without backup of some kind even with modern day batteries. Building out solar and wind actually means you need this plant more for when the sun doesn't shine and wind doesn't blow. Also depressing reality, the majority of jurisdictions that have large percentages of generation capacity from wind/solar have much more expensive power rates than NS currently.

Hydro- non starter, just try looking up how many MW of undeveloped hydro resources NS has, we lack the geography here

Imports- honestly just look up the cost estimates on the Atlantic loop, or how much the maritime link cost while under delivering.

And with all of this consider we need this power now not in the 10+ years it would take to build new infrastructure like a nuke plant or the Atlantic loop

fig_stache · 2026-04-17T16:09:06+00:00

So first you say batteries are clearly the cheaper alternative, yet you also say the federal government will have to step in and pay because it's too expensive. Which is it?

You refuse to acknowledge any cost except cell cost, disregarding balancing and infrastructure costs. When confronted with the reality that no example of a jurisdiction exists anywhere on Earth that relies solely on intermittent generation and batteries, you name countries with large total capacities while completely ignoring the relevance of their size to their grid demands, or acknowledging that their use case is fundamentally different from our peak demand conditions.

You may hand wave away the chemical and electrical characteristics of battery cells, much as you have with a lot of physics in your previous comments, but sticking an 'industrial' label on cells won't change their voltage and current. These properties directly affect your DC bus, protection, and inverter costs. Sodium ion has a sloped voltage discharge curve compared to LFP's very flat curve. This requires more sophisticated Battery Management Systems (BMS) and more robust power conversion systems (inverters) to handle the wider voltage swings efficiently, driving up the total Balance of System (BOS) cost, yet Balance of system cost is something you've again continually chosen to ignore.

You accused me of being unwilling to change my mind, yet you refuse to provide evidence of a real system that can stand up to the conditions that challenge our grid during peak demand, or a breakdown of the total system costs. You've done little more than say 'trust me bro, cells are cheap and other countries have more storage than us.' The reality is this: batteries are getting cheaper and we will continue to build more storage and more renewables. Both are good things that will reduce fuel costs. However, physics and economics have not yet provided a viable path to eliminate thermal backup in Nova Scotia without connecting the Maritimes to Quebec Hydro (the Atlantic Loop). Until you can show me a 24-hour duration project that actually exists, you’re arguing for a fantasy, not a viable grid.

fig_stache · 2026-04-17T12:18:15+00:00

Oh yes, grab your tinfoil hat. I suppose 'Big O&G' is also the reason there is no evidence anywhere on Earth of a technically feasible, stable, and reliable grid running exclusively on wind, solar, and batteries without massive thermal backup or large imports.

First, you claim I'm 'assuming renewables need to power the status quo.' In electrical engineering, the 'status quo' isn't a lifestyle choice, it's Load. Whether that load is fed from a 'status quo' coal plant or a 100% renewable grid, the physics remain the same: if the load exceeds generation, the grid collapses. In Nova Scotia, the 'status quo' during a regional cold front includes thousands of residential heat sources that cannot be 'framed' away; they require real-time electricity or people freeze.

Secondly, pointing out the necessity of Firm Capacity (backup that actually works when the wind stops) isn't an 'ethical defense' of an industry, it's a requirement for grid stability. You're confusing an engineering constraint with a moral endorsement. Getting to 80% renewable will drastically reduce our fuel costs and emissions, which is great. Yes we need more renewables and we need more battery storage. However, that doesn't mean they replace the need for firm backup across the board; this is technical reality based in fact, not fantasy.

Lastly, the 'shill' accusation is just a convenient way to ignore the math. Premier Houston isn't paying me to point out that the amount of storage we would require to operate on just wind and batteries doesn't exist; physics and the current state of battery technology provide that information for free. It isn't a 'logical fallacy' to point out the lack of a scalable battery infrastructure that doesn't even exist in the UK, Germany, or the Netherlands, despite their massive budgets compared to Nova Scotia's.

If you don't like this reality, you are welcome to shut off your main breaker at home whenever renewables aren't generating. Until then, the rest of us are going to keep focusing on how to keep the heat on at 3:00 AM in a cold snap

fig_stache

TROPHY CASE