Province of Quebec (Canada) is considering mandating that all new houses to be equiped with an 240V EV charging station

[RagnarokDel]

Hmm? When was part of Hydro-Quebec sold? Ontario sold part of it's crown corporation but I never heard of Hydro-Quebec being sold? It was suggested a few times by retarded conservative economists but it would be a terrible idea. Hydro-Québec made 3,147 billion in net income last year from a revenue of only 13.7 billion... The proposal would sell about 20% of the company for peanuts which is entirely retarded when you can earn as much money from dividends over a decade.

2 hours ago, suicidalfranco said:

0.074€ here and the energy is composed of 51% renewable, 21% gas and 18% coal

Quebec's electricity is virtually produced entirely out of renewable energy now that the 1 nuclear station is in the process of closing. There's still a few gas stations but they never work except in extreme case scenarios. Like 99.9% of the time it's only hydro, Wind or solar.

2 hours ago, BobbyG2 said:

Because government mandates are a form of coercion, and I'm a voluntaryist.

You should probably go lick your lead paint off the walls then. Wtf are you on?

2 hours ago, BobbyG2 said:

I'm a libertarian,  borderline anarco-capitalist. I believe the role of government should be limited to protecting the rights of citizens and that's it. I am very much against the idea of Democracy (mob rule).

 

 

The right to safety is protected by the canadian charter of rights.

[BobbyG2]

6 minutes ago, thekeemo said:

Not necessarily.

The money goes back into things like making higher levels of education cheaper.

What people do with that education is innovate.

Possibly, but a fraction of that education is in the fields that benifit the energy industry.  You're robbing one industry to fund all industries.  If the industry was allowed to compete, they would be forced to innovate.  Monopolies in a free market economy can't last forever unless they innovate enough to prevent competition from rising against it.  If the industry refuses to innovate and charge competitive prices,  competition will rise due to the demand for better services. 

[thekeemo]

 

Just now, BobbyG2 said:

Possibly, but a fraction of that education is in the fields that benifit the energy industry.  You're robbing one industry to fund all industries.  If the industry was allowed to compete, they would be forced to innovate.  Monopolies in a free market economy can't last forever unless they innovate enough to prevent competition from rising against it.  If the industry refuses to innovate and charge competitive prices,  competition will rise due to the demand for better services. 

They dont benefit from refusing to innovate.  As an example the waste and transportation here is publicly owned. They are both constantly upgrading and making it better.

[BobbyG2]

28 minutes ago, RagnarokDel said:

 

You should probably go lick your lead paint off the walls then. Wtf are you on?

 

In a free market economy,  companies would be forced to offer safe alternatives as people demand it. 

16 minutes ago, thekeemo said:

 

They dont benefit from refusing to innovate. 

Could you refraise or elaborate on that for me? 

 

20 minutes ago, thekeemo said:

 

 As an example the waste and transportation here is publicly owned. They are both constantly upgrading and making it better.

At what benefit to the customers or industry? What does public ownership add besides a layer of beaurocracy costing additional tax dollars? What evidence is there to suggest that these industries are innovating more than if they were forced to compete? 

[dalekphalm]

2 hours ago, BobbyG2 said:

It is most likely because their is little to no competition in the energy industry. This means no motivation to innovate or to charge competitive prices. This lack of competition is due to almost total government control over the industry.

There's little to no competition in Quebec, and their energy sector is doing just fine. Ontario's problems are mismanagement, I would say. A "free market" doesn't guarantee that will change. Canada knows this to a very intimate degree, just look at our Telecom industry (Internet and Cellphone). We have competition, but they essentially collude with each other to keep prices high.

1 hour ago, Yog said:

Why on earth force people who have no need for it to make this expense? If you're purchasing a car, no matter what type it is, you should account for the other expenses - in this case, the installation of a charger. Does Quebec force all homes to be wheelchair accessible? That's a more valid requirement and even that I think is unwarranted.

Playing Devil's Advocate here, but pretty much every house has a driveway - yet many people don't own cars or even drive at all.

 

I think if the cost was very high, then I'd be more weary of implementing an unnecessary thing - but for new construction, it's $400... that's nothing when building a house.

[BobbyG2]

14 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

There's little to no competition in Quebec, and their energy sector is doing just fine. Ontario's problems are mismanagement, I would say. A "free market" doesn't guarantee that will change.

A free market guarantees that a company is forced to provide service at a price and quality exceptable enough to hold enough customers to stay in business,  or risk being replaced by another company that rises out of a demand for better service or prices. 

 

19 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Canada knows this to a very intimate degree, just look at our Telecom industry (Internet and Cellphone). We have competition, but they essentially collude with each other to keep prices high.

Here in the U.S., there are many laws that benifit large corporations over small start ups,  ensuring that large corporations are able to survive with minimal innovation and competition. 

 

For example:

- Corporations sign contacts with cities and counties forbidding any company other than the one (s) in the contract from providing service in the area. This includes Internet,  TV, and cell services.  

- Corporations lobby the FCC to regulate radio wavelengths to make it more difficult for new companies to start  a cell service, as they have regulatory hoops they have to jump through.  All bandwidths not yet owned go up for auction when a company wants to buy a new bandwidth,  and big corporations can block small start ups by out bidding them. 

There are many more laws like this but these are the biggest culprits. 

37 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

 

I think if the cost was very high, then I'd be more weary of implementing an unnecessary thing - but for new construction, it's $400... that's nothing when building a house.

I agree, but I don't agree with the government mandating it. When you advocate government mandating something,  you also advocate for government to fine and/or jail people who don't follow said mandate. I don't agree that people who choose not to have a car charger built in with their house should be fined/jailed/or evicted. It's their property,  they should be able to choose what features are built into their house. 

[GoodBytes]

1 hour ago, BobbyG2 said:

It is most likely because their is little to no competition in the energy industry. This means no motivation to innovate or to charge competitive prices. This lack of competition is due to almost total government control over the industry.

Note:

I respect your views fully. I just want to make this clear. As a heads up, I have a counter example to what you are saying, but I'll shoot myself on the foot right after. My point is not to disagree with your views, but to disagree with your specific point, but I think I know where you are coming from, which I explain bellow as an example that support your point.

 

So here goes:

 

Incorrect. Hydro-Quebec has done plenty or ground braking innovations.

Including big advancements in hydro-dams, from the way they are built, to maximizing outputs, to electric lines monitoring to know where they are down, High-voltage circuit breaker monitoring system, 735-kV lines (an innovation that drop the number the lines needed to transport power drastically compared to before, and significantly drop power loss over extended distance by considerable amount back in the days (for example, a dam would need to operate 1-2 turbine extra, just to compensate the power loss, instead of providing additional power) and today it is still one of the best methods in term of cost and energy transportation). 735 kV lines was seen at totally impossible back in the day, let alone 315 kV to start with, and a lot more....

 

This was all done under Hydro-Quebec, while under Montreal Light, Heat and Power Company who gain monopoly by buying everyone out (as we can see there was no governmental intervention), and absolutely 0 innovation was done.  Hydro-Quebec in 2015, had a net income of $3,147 Million dollars Canadian. And you can't say it is from price gouging, because we have one of the cheapest electricity in the world.

 

So I call B.S on your claim. The reason for why what you said is not true, is that the government runs the crown corporation, and its goals is to make money. Lots of money.

In order to do this, it needs to sale products and solutions, not only to its population, but also to outside markets, and that means it needs to be competitive with other electric company around the globe.

 

Government role is to reflect what the population needs, and serves the population. If the population benefits, it means better conditions, which translates to better jobs, which translate to better economy, which translate to higher level of happiness, which translate to more votes.

 

What you are probably mistaken, is when the government control a SECTOR, and not a business. For example, in Quebec, the very same, our heath care is the one that needs health care. Basically, in its early days, like in most provinces in Canada our public heath care was at the forefront, and running like clock works. But sadly, as health care in Quebec (each provinces manages their heath care), isn't run to make money, it has no insensitive to be profitable... so you have your union staff, you have stupid limitations everywhere, it is very bureaucratic, lots of wasted resources, and it is not helped by the fact that innovation in medical science, moves fast which adds a lot of crap around to provide such innovation and services, and then you have the mentality of people going at the ER for a paper cut... all adds stresses to the system, not to mention that most doctors simply leaves the province as soon as they graduate, taking advantage of the dirt cheap education system, to go in the U.S and work in an area that less stressful (less work), and higher pay. Anyway, it is a complicated topic, with a lot of history behind it. But still works today, and if you have a real emergency, you are taking care off, and leave with a lollipop and not a bill that will make you in debt the rest of your life, only to have a heart attack, and double that bill. But, as you said, as it isn't a businessmen, you don't have any R&D. The only R&D done is limited to universities in medical field, and some side governmental run labs, but they are generally small compared to the multi-million/billion dollar facilities from private companies in the U.S. So innovation is limited as you said. In Canada, there is no crown corporation of a pharmaceutical company.

 

So that is the difference. U.S ISPs is a perfect example of why you are thinking is not working... on paper it works (like many things), but much like my example of failure, yours is when the corporation highly influence the government to use it as a puppet of sorts, to block innovation, by blocking competition. Google, despite its massive resources, has trouble providing internet. Tesla has trouble selling its care in many states.

 

 

 

 

[Yog]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

 

Playing Devil's Advocate here, but pretty much every house has a driveway - yet many people don't own cars or even drive at all.

 

I think if the cost was very high, then I'd be more weary of implementing an unnecessary thing - but for new construction, it's $400... that's nothing when building a house.

There's a couple differences. First is, while not everyone has a car, the percentage is pretty high, much higher than the percentage of people who own or plan to own an EV. Second, I don't even think driveways are required.

 

And let me be clear, I'm not saying people shouldn't have EV chargers in their homes...personally I think if you're building a new house it's in your best interest to install a charger. It's going to add more value to your home than it costs...it's a no-brainer in my opinion...but it should still be up to you because you know you better than anyone else. Maybe we can't think of a reason why it wouldn't be desired...maybe that $400 install can be used better for other things.

[JaeDee884]

On 4/22/2016 at 5:28 AM, GoodBytes said:

$0.0571 / kWh here

http://www.hydroquebec.com/residential/customer-space/account-and-billing/understanding-bill/residential-rates/rate-d.html

 how is power so cheap, I pay 0.2554pKwh plus 50.35c a day connection charge because i have solar.

[MimigaKing]

11 minutes ago, JaeDee884 said:

 how is power so cheap, I pay 0.2554pKwh plus 50.35c a day connection charge because i have solar.

because 90% of Quebec is inhabited lands with thousands of rivers. They can put as many hydroelectricity stations as they wish and still have plenty of unused power to sell to the US. 

 

Also, take note. Although I don't understand how that's even possible. Even with such cheap electricity, there are still several dozens of thousands of people who can't pay their bill. 

 

There was an article last week about a blind guy that owe 10k to the electric company and got disconnected for it. He was like... "why did you disconnect me?".... I couldn't help myself saying.. "what did you #*&# expect? I'd disconnect you too if you owed me 10k!"

 

 

[RagnarokDel]

3 hours ago, JaeDee884 said:

 how is power so cheap, I pay 0.2554pKwh plus 50.35c a day connection charge because i have solar.

Québec has 3% of the world's renewable fresh water. We're probably going to be the new Middle-East in 2100 (aka a war zone)

 

We have over 5000 rivers and a million lakes.

 

 

[Mihle]

Sounds like  Québec is preatty close to what Norway is. lots of energy from water, is pretty socialist and have cheap electricity.

Power is less than 0,04$ per kWh here.

 

but those that say socialism does not work, do you also mean Scandinavia does not work? we have the highest standards of living here.

 

things like health, school and stuff should be owned by the state for them to act in the citizens favour.

 

other sectors should just be heavily regulated, but still be more than one company.