Slashdot Mirror


Cooling Toronto Using Lake Ontario

An anonymous reader writes "Air cooled by the frigid waters deep in Lake Ontario started bringing relief to buildings in downtown Toronto on Tuesday after the valves were symbolically opened on the multi-million-dollar project. The company says that they have the capacity to air condition 100 office buildings or 8,000 homes - the equivalent of 32 million square feet of building space. They note that the cooling system reduces energy usage, freeing up megawatts from the Ontario's electrical grid, minimizes ozone-depleting refrigerants and reduces the amount of carbon dioxide entering the air."

25 of 698 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Just two questions by jonbryce · · Score: 5, Informative

    Q1 is a valid concern.

    Q2 is apparently answered in the article. Approx 25% of the energy requirements for electrical air con.

  2. Re:Environmental effects by Rxke · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the article:

    "...Brought to the John St. Pumping Station, the water's cold will be extracted and used to lower the temperature in downtown buildings. The water will then be treated and enter the city's drinking supply...."

    So might be a double whammy, the water isn't directly injected into the lake again.

  3. Re:Environmental effects by gowen · · Score: 5, Informative

    No it won't, because the water used to cool the air is the same water that would be extracted anyway, to provide potable water to the city. See this schematic. Notice the warm water is not returned to Lake Ontario.

    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
  4. Re:Environmental effects by Curtman · · Score: 5, Informative

    This has been covered extensively on Discovery Canada, which I watch regularly. Here's a quote that puts this into perspective:

    ...He said environmental studies show the system will cause a temperature increase [each year] equivalent to the heat the lake surface absorbs during seven seconds of sunshine....
    -Toronto cools off using Lake Ontario waters

  5. The answer is in the article. by bit4byte · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the site they use the city water supply
    that feeds from the bottom of the lake to cool down
    a closed loop system, which is then used to cool down the offices/homes. No warm water is fed back into the lake. So the lake should not heat up at all.

  6. The lake is NOT warming up ! by arska · · Score: 5, Informative

    RTFA !
    Look at the diagram on http://www.enwave.com/enwave/dlwc/ They warm up the city's drinking water by a few degrees.

    A

  7. The London Underground is also doing this by carndearg · · Score: 4, Informative
    The London Underground is doing this as well, though they are doing it with the ground water they pump out of the tunnels. If it relieves the sweaty hell of a crowded Tube train it gets my vote!

    Here's the BBC's story about it.

  8. Another link by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the CBC

    No registration required;

    http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/08/ 17 /enwave_040817.html

  9. Re:Messing with lakes: NOT a good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think this is unlikely to be a problem.

    Lakes 'turn over' like this when there has been long-term stratification of the water. Stratification occurs when a layer of warm, less dense, water forms over the colder, denser, lower layers. This is stable since the heat of the sun reinforces the stratification. Only a seasonal reduction in sunlight, or strong winds, can mix the layers.

    Lake Nyos is in a tropical area where there is a permanent, marked stratication due to year-round abundant sunlight. Since mixing of layers is so rare, hug amounts of gas can accumulate in lower layers. This is dangerous should something trigger a rapid breakdown of the stratification - such as the landslide in Nyos.

    In temperate areas stratification is confined to the summer, only then is there sufficient sunlight. In other seasons stratification breaks down and mixing occurs such that a potentially dangerous build up of gas is not possible.

  10. Re:Messing with lakes: NOT a good idea by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 4, Informative

    They're not sending the warmed (by 8'C) water directly back - it goes to drinking water supply. The CO2 thing IS super-scary though, imagine living by a lake like that (which people still do) :-O

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  11. Actually, water DOES flow down hill by Analogy+Man · · Score: 5, Informative
    The scematic does not show the back half of the municipal system (sewer and waste water treatment).

    As a grandson of a plumber I can confirm that the water does eventually end up back in the lake. Rule #1 of plumbing ...water flows down hill.

    The beauty of this implementation is that the incremental warming of the water may actually further save energy if slightly warmer water comes into water heaters. From a thermodynamic standpoint this looks like a very large geothermal system. The economies of scale may make it quite cost effective too.

    --
    When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
  12. Re:Environmental effects by Catmeat · · Score: 5, Informative
    I suspect a little thing called Winter will have an effect.

    I'm annoyed by all this hysterical nonsense over environmental effects on the lake. Apart from the fact that the heat input is trivial given the size of the lake (do you know what the heat capacity of 393 cubic miles of water is?) People think the lake is not some finite reservoir of coolness - no, it's a heat store, it cools down in the winter people! Consider the hitorical effect of tens of thouands of summers if that were not true.

    In all this ranting, the very real envirnoemental benfits of reducing energy consumption and CO2 emissions get lost in the noise. I'd have expected better from the so-called technically literate.

  13. Re:Environmental effects by Tuzanor · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, Greenpeace is completely backing this endeavor. The water they're taking was also part of an overall plan to upgrade the drinking water plants, so the water is just being diverted before going into the drinking water. Then the water just returns through where the water has always been going (sewers, water treatment, and then probably the lake).

  14. Re:Just two questions by ediron2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Man, I can't believe I'm getting sucked into this moronic, paranoiac debate.

    1 - Lake Ontario doesn't freeze over, but it does have some surface ice in midwinter. Ice implies a surface temp at or below 0 degrees c. Right?

    2 - Having lived next to another sizeable lake (Lake Champlain, which typically does freeze over), and as an EXPERT in hydrodynamic modelling, I can assure you that that niggling little physics detail about water having maximum density at... (drum roll) 4 degrees C is accurate. However, twice a year, lakes like Ontario have all their water churned about as ambient average temp falls below 4 degrees C, then as ambient temp rises above 4 c. Wierd, but true. Frankly, seiche's are wierder.

    3 - So, as winter gets cold enough, any water not AT 4 degrees C rolls to the surface, where it is... say it with me... chilled by the Toronto winters. Before any ice is made, everything in the lake chills to 4 degrees C (this is my biggest oversimplification here, since inversion layers can exist in large water bodies. It doesn't matter in the overall calcs to follow, since all I was interested in showing is the mechanics for recharge of the cold zone).

    4 - The thermal mass of Lake Ontario (one site says 86 m average depth, x 19,000 km^2 in area... 19,000,000,000 x 86 x 100 ^3 cm^3 per meter x 1 degree c x 0.0039683 btu's per calorie x .000000293 btu's per megawatt hour = 2* 10 ^9th Megawatt hours needed.

    The Fact Sheet on Enwave's site says they're gonna free up 59 megawatts. Now, I should be able to disregard a part of this as an efficiency improvement (electricity for cooling is gawdawfully inefficient, compared to non-compressive heat exchangers like this'll use), but I'll eat the inefficiency because that's the nice guy I am. 59 x 24 x 365 (megawatt-years to megawatt-hours) gets us *finally* to matching units. If I haven't completely bolluxed the calculation, we're looking at a capability of handling 3673 of these facilities. Or, the temp of Lake O going up 1/3673 of a degree.

    Oh. Yay. The little fishies aren't even going to notice this. In fact, there's room for exporting this capability and if we're willing to warm Lake O by a few degrees I think it'd take care of the AC demands of most of North America, if them clever Canadians can just figure out a way to export this.

    When she's working hard, the sun 'wastes' enough energy warming up dirt and water around the world to fuel our needs a thousandfold over. When she's not paying attention (at the poles, nights and winters), earth's radiating it off like gangbusters.

    The risk of us boogering up our surroundings when we do BIG things is a valid one. But not here, not yet.

    We've reached the point where we're influencing the world in several spots: cfc's, pesticides, acid rain, particulate emissions, garbage, animal populations, etc. etc. etc.

    But this isn't one of them. As a side joke, I bet there are a few million Toronto residents that'd be more than happy to let the thermal average temp of Lake O go up 30 degrees, just for the lake-effect warmth it'd impart on their town each winter and the ability to swim without turning blue in midsummer. Back during a nasty winter ('93), a favorite bumper sticker of mine was 'Another Vermonter *for* global warming'.

    Rock on Toronto & Enwave.com

  15. Re:Environmental effects by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Informative
    Well, at least in Chicago (on Lake Michigan) they take from the bottom already: See here.

    Since this has been going on since the 1800's, I think you could probably estimate the environmental impact based on Chicago's experience.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  16. Re:Environmental effects by JediTrainer · · Score: 4, Informative

    So might be a double whammy, the water isn't directly injected into the lake again.

    I live just north of Toronto, in Markham (part of York Region).

    We get our drinking water from Lake Ontario. All of the GTA (Greater Toronto Area), including the City of Toronto, York Region, Durham, Peel etc, use water pumped from the lake.

    Our sewage is sent back down to Toronto, where it is treated before being dumped back into the lake. In fact, they're in the middle of building an additional set of sewage pipes to further growth in York Region (sort of controversial, because they're affecting groundwater and the Oak Ridges Moraine while they're doing it. Long story - google for details).

    In other words, I don't think it would make any difference, because we've already been drawing our water from there. It's just coming from a different part of the lake.

    --

    You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
  17. Similar implementation by PrebleNY · · Score: 5, Informative

    A similar lake source cooling project was implemented at Cornell while I was there. They tore up half the campus laying 36" pipe down to the nearby lake. Of course this project is much larger (with a larger lake as well), but from what I have heard the Cornell project has been a success despite the hand wringing of the radical environmentalist. The Toronto plan seems to be even better as they are not discharging the water directly back to the lake (as they do in Ithaca) but are processing it for drinking water. more information on the Cornell LSC website http://www.utilities.cornell.edu/LSC/default.htm

  18. Is Chicago out of luck? by geoswan · · Score: 4, Informative
    Your link is interesting. I have one too. It took me a minute or two to figure out this page. The map of lake michigan in the lower right hand corner has five lines drawn through it. The five color coded temperature charts each illustrate the temperature at various depths through a slice of the lake. The one closest to Chicago is slice "A", correct?

    There was an interview on the morning news yesterday with a guy who is a big fan of this technology. The interviewer asked him if this technology could be used in other cities on the Great Lakes. Yes, he said. There were various cities where it could be used. Rochester and Milwaukee were two examples he offered. But, he said, it could not be used in Chicago. Presumably because Chicago doesn't have easy access to a deep cold layer.

    Here in Toronto we have always taken our water from deep in the lake too. As you can see from this map the depth drops precipitously just off Toronto Island.

    The American fan of this technology was Alec Baldwin, the actor.

    The interviewer next asked him if any of those other cities were considering following Toronto's example. He replied that he was flying to Chicago that afternoon to make a presentation.

  19. Re:Environmental effects by mwood · · Score: 4, Informative

    In sufficiently large bodies of water there's this thing called the thermocline, separating surface circulation from deeper circulation. It's somewhat like two different bodies of water stacked one on top of the other -- there's less mixing between the two than one would naively expect.

    Taking deep water, warming it, and returning it disturbs the system, and it would be prudent to understand the effects of that disturbance. If the city's already doing that for drinking and washing, well, now they are doing a whole lot more of it and the effects will be more pronounced, so again it's prudent to understand the effect of increasing the pressure on the system's equilibrium.

    I don't study large lakes and I don't know what significant effects, if any, might be expected. I just hope that someone *does* study this particular lake and *does* understand the issues and *was* consulted.

    I do hope it works out well. It's a nifty idea.

    Finally, this ignorant Yank must admit that his first thought was, "Toronto needs *cooling*?" :-)

  20. You have never been to Niagara Falls, have you? by geoswan · · Score: 4, Informative
    but in the long run the lake will evapourate, making the climate in the region less stable (water holding a lot of heat is one of the main reasons the earth has such a (relatively) mild climate) with hotter summers and colder winters, leading to the requirement of more heating in winter and more air conditioning in summer... brilliant

    Lake Erie and Lake Ontario have about the same surface area. But Lake Ontario is much deeper and so has a greater volume. I have links here to charts showing the temperatures, at various depths across various slices of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario.

    Note that Lake Erie is much warmer. But most of the water in Lake Ontario came from Lake Erie? Why is it so much colder? It cools off in the winter time. It takes water from the Niagara River six years before it flows down the St Lawrence.

    If, for the sake of argument, Rochester, Kingston, Hamilton all used deep lake cooling, and they all grew so much that they exhausted the Lake's deep layer, Lake Ontario would still not evaporate, any more than Lake Erie evaporates away to nothing.

    Yes, there are deep areas of Lake Ontario that have been at 4 degrees celsius for a long time. How long? Since the last ice age? The glaciers covered the entire Great Lake basin a few tens of thousands of years ago. So that is how long a unique deep lake water ecosystem would have had to evolve.

    How much water would the cities have to draw from the deep layer to use up all the cold layer? I don't think you understand how deep the Lake is, and how great its volume. Look at these three maps. West Centre East. So, lets say the deep layer is currently something like half to one third of the volume of the lake. The cities would have to use up the equivalent of the flow of two or three niagaras worth of water in order to drain all the deep cold water.

    So long as our winters continue to get cold enough for the lake to cool to 4 degrees the cold layer gets regenerated every winter.

    I think it could be argued, if Global warming every gets bad enough that using deep lake cooling exhausts the cold layer in mid-summer that, since we have the infrastructure in place, we use it every summer until it is exhausted. What about the cold deep lake water ecosystem? I am all for preserving interesting, unique ecosystems. But I doubt that a few tens of thousands of years is long enough for it to become interesting and unique.

  21. Re:Environmental effects by alienw · · Score: 5, Informative

    Warming up a lake a few degrees would take a ridiculous amount of energy, more than any city could possibly put into a lake. Calculate it, it takes 4.184 joules to warm up one gram of water one degree C. There are 1640 km^3 of water in Lake Ontario. That's 1 640 000 000 000 cubic meters, which is 1.64 × 10^18 grams. 1.64e18 * 1.0 deg C * 4.184 J/g-degC = 6.87e18 J. This is 1906044444444 kilowatt-hours, which is a hell of a lot.

  22. Re:Environmental effects by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Informative

    The amount of extra energy this will put in to the lake should be close to zero. The water is going to be used as drinking water once they dump a little heat into it. If they where taking that water from the lake to drink anyway the total change from right now should be zero.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  23. Re:Environmental effects by k12linux · · Score: 4, Informative
    Based on the info I could find online Lake Ontario contains just over 1.6 trillion(US) metric tons of water or almost 3.6 quadrillion(US) pounds. One BTU is required to heat 1 pound of water 1 degree (F).

    According to a cooling calculator online, a 30x60 office building would require approx 23.5 million BTU cooling over the course of a month. This assumes the building is insulated (I'm sure all Toronto buildings are) and that it's longest wall faces the sun. It also assumes cooling 24 hours a day. (If somone out there is a cooling systems engineer or contractor, why not share the actual cooling needs for typical office builings?)

    Based on the numbers (and assuming the cooling plant is fairly efficient) then you should be able to cool somewhere around 51 million such buildings for three months (about the max cooling season there) before you have transfered enough heat to raise the lake's temperature one degree. I suspect if you used accurate heat transfer numbers you'd find it would take even more time.

    In other words, before you could make any significant difference in the lake temperature, the next winter should re-cool the water already as others have mentioned.

  24. Mod parent down - untrue by dschl · · Score: 4, Informative

    Read this post. Lake Ontario (like most lakes in Canada) mixes once a year in the autumn (turnover, or overturn - I've heard both terms used), usually in the late fall prior to freezeup. The lake is only stratified in the summer, and the only special property held by water at the bottom is a lower temperature in the summer.

    --
    Slashdot - the place where you can look like a genius by restating the obvious
  25. Re:Environmental effects by MemoryAid · · Score: 5, Informative
    I don't study large lakes either, but I did take a few minutes to run some numbers. Based on somebody's claim of 430 trillion gallons of water in Lake Ontario (and I assumed US gallons, as that is the most common gallon still in use), I came up with 216700 megawatts required to raise the average temperature of the lake one Kelvin in one year.

    I assumed standard water (1 kg/L) when converting from volume to mass. I also used only two significant digits for specific heat capacity (4.2 kJ/KgK). I also assumed uniform temperature and uniform heat distribution because I'm looking for averages, to get an idea of order of magnitude.

    Anyway, I RTFA and saw that the cooling power is only about 207 megawatts. That convinced me to rule out any macroscopic environmental consequences and get on with my life.

    --
    Language students: Don't try to learn English here. This ain't it.