Heating with electricity most of the time… and with natural gas when it’s very cold.
Posted at 5:00 a.m.
This is the idea proposed by Hydro-Québec to tens of thousands of customers currently connected to the Énergir network.
However, this solution is contested before the Régie de l’énergie by a host of environmental groups and industrial groups.
So much the better.
Because before embarking on the adventure of dual energy, it is absolutely necessary to ensure that it is the best option both for consumers and for achieving our environmental targets.
It is very far from clear in both cases.
For the environment, dual-energy has an obvious downside: we continue to burn GHG-emitting gas.
Hydro-Quebec says this is essential to manage the winter peak, during which power needs explode. Quebec must then import electricity. And this electricity often comes from polluting sources.
Converting all natural gas systems to 100% electric solutions would put even greater demands on the grid.
It is indisputable.
It is also true that dual energy does not lead to a dead end that “locks in” the options. We are not talking here about building new infrastructures for fossil fuels, but about using those that already exist.
Those who have a dual-energy system will eventually be able to turn off the gas tap and continue entirely on electric.
The question we must ask ourselves, however, is: why wait? Quebec is committed to becoming carbon neutral by 2050. The winter peak, we will one day have to manage it without the crutch of fossil fuels. Why not tackle it now?
This is especially true given that the province is seriously behind its 2030 reduction target. Emissions from the transportation sector, the largest emitter, are climbing instead of falling. This means one thing: other sectors will have to do more than their share.
The building sector, which accounts for 10% of Quebec’s emissions, presents a known and mastered solution for decarbonizing: electrification.
Yes, it comes with challenges. But no one said the energy transition would be easy.
This week, an Écohabitation study showed that there is an alternative to dual energy: the installation of a heat pump coupled with a heat accumulator in homes.
The heat pump is an extremely efficient device, the best models being able to extract heat from the outside air even when it is at -25°C and bring it inside.
The heat accumulator, on the other hand, stores the heat in bricks and can redistribute it later. This is another way to soften the tip. We are not talking here about a prototype in a garage. Hydro-Québec has itself contributed to developing a heat accumulator and is offering grants of $10,000 for its installation.
The Écohabitation study shows that for citizens, the heat pump option with heat accumulator could prove to be less expensive to use than dual energy.
True, the initial costs are higher. But remember that the Green Fund struggles to finance initiatives that really reduce GHGs. Here’s one that would work.
We do not say that heat accumulators are perfect. But given the number of experts who support them, it would be in our interest to study the matter seriously. Citizens who change their heating system will not want to do it again in ten years.
Let’s finish with the most shocking aspect of the dual-energy program. Its implementation would obviously mean that Énergir would sell less natural gas. These losses, Hydro-Québec, magnanimously, offers to compensate them. The bill could reach 4 billion by 2050.
Who would pay? Hydro customers through rate increases.
You read that right: clean energy users would pay the polluting energy distributor because it is losing market share with the energy transition. Industrial electricity consumers have it in their throats. We understand them.
This clause alone proves the need to thoroughly re-examine the idea of dual energy.