Significant scenic area of Ontario could be affected
Residents of North Frontenac and Addington Highlands (also known as Land O’ Lakes area) have organized to fight the threatened 150-turbine wind power development by NextEra.
NextEra is the renewable energy arm of the U.S. power company, Florida Light and Power. As Parker Gallant has revealed in a post on this site, FPL is doing so well scooping up subsidy money here in Ontario, they have actually provided rate reductions to their customers in the United States.
See the website for the Bon Echo Area Residents Against Turbineshere. The website is under construction and promises more detail later, but features a petition for signing now.
Citizens recently held a community meeting in Denbigh that included presentations by Parker Gallant and Carmen Krogh.
The group also has a Twitter account bearatorg and Facebook page.
Fifteen months after it was launched, the report from Andre Marin, Ontario’s Ombudsman, is finally out.
Exactly why it took 15 months to complete is worrisome: there have been literally dozens and dozens of articles on this issue, an Auditor General’s report, numerous letters to the editor, TV and radio exposure, etc., that detailed Hydro One’s billing and smart meter problems since the Ombudsman’s announcement of an investigation.
Hydro One was the fifth most complained about provincial entity for the 2011 and 2012 year, according to the Ombudsman’s own annual reports. Many of the articles and letters go back well before the launch of his investigation. Most of those earlier complaints were connected to billing issues as a result of “smart meters” installed by Hydro One, but Mr. Marin clearly states in the 119-page report “we received many complaints about subjects that were not the focus of this investigation – chiefly, electricity pricing and smart meters.” Were those complaints included in his estimation of the 10,000 plus he claimed they investigated?
Why were “smart meter” related issues simply ignored? Was it a lack of technical abilities within the Ombudsman’s office, or a case of being overwhelmed by the billing problems? Why wouldn’t the Ombudsman at least note in one of his 66 recommendations that someone with the technical skills should investigate the “smart meter” problems?
Surprisingly the report also says nothing about how the Ontario Energy Board has ignored Hydro One’s problems with the smart meters, nothing about the Energy Ministry’s role or their lack of oversight, and basically nothing critical of Hydro One’s senior management and its apparent failings. Was Mr. Marin concerned any critique about those subjects might lead to his contract not being renewed? If that was the case he doesn’t deserve to be our watchdog.
I have reviewed the findings in the report and his 66 recommendations and found many to be repetitive and overlapping. I also found the report skirted many of the issues that needed examination as the root cause of the billing problems. In my humble opinion, the Ombudsman’s prejudice against the private sector also shines brightly in the report as does his self-proclamation of his personal skill sets.
Ken Little (L) and Thomas LoTurco of EDP presenting to South Dundas Council in April: everything is tickety-boo.
EDP Renewables held one of its mandatory community liaison meetings last night, ironically in Dixon’s Corners where so many community meetings had been held by residents opposed to the project.
The wind power project is a great success declared project manager Ken Little. He dispelled concerns about the “charge of lease” issue*, and noise complaints, and insisted that the community is in favour and supportive of the power project.
The Ministry of the Environment representative from the Cornwall district office was also in attendance and admitted that the power developer has yet to file its mandatory noise testing report, as the required higher wind speeds have not been achieved. Therefore the Ministry does not have appropriate data and does not intend to pursue any enforcement action for non-compliance with the regulations.
No one actually measuring noise for compliance
This statement was a shock to those present who have lodged noise complaints (Ottawa Wind Concerns is aware that the first noise complaint was filed two weeks after the turbines began operating). People in at least one residence in Brinston lodged enough complaints that the Ministry conducted a noise audit on site—those results are not available to the public, the MoE representative said.
In the absence of an active community group in South Branch at present, Ottawa Wind Concerns will answer any questions as bet we can: ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com
*Editor’s note: Mr Little is following the wind power lobby group guideline of claiming the charge of lease “issue” (where developers can obtain financing which is then registered on title) is simply a rumour, and is “nobody’s business.” The fact is, the charge of lease potential is yet another characteristic in wind power leases that land owners need to be aware of, and can affect their ability to obtain financing.
SOUTH DUNDAS – The province’s Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) has given South Dundas slim to virtually no chance of having more renewable energy projects.
The Circuit and Station Transmission Availability Tables released Friday by the IESO shows “No Availability” for the five transmission circuits serving the Brinston-area of South Dundas.
The report has likely left plans for two windmill projects in that area of South Dundas twisting in the wind.
EDP Renewables had planned a 50-100 megawatt windmill project northeast of Brinston, which would have been serviced by 40 windmills. Despite repeated calls and emails from Cornwall Newswatch, Project Manager Ken Little has not responded.
Chicago-based Invenergy wanted a slightly smaller project of 50-90 megawatts serviced by 20-25 windmills. The Nine Mile Wind Project would be west of Brinston.
“Invenergy has received the transmission availability report from the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), and we are reviewing the connection options for the Nine Mile Project. (We will) have no further comment until our assessment is complete,” a company spokeswoman said in an email to Cornwall Newswatch.
IESO spokeswoman Alexandra Campbell says, while the table will show no circuit availability, a company can still apply. She says the tables are a snapshot in time and are based on a conservative estimate for power needs. Campbell called them “guidelines.”
“A proponent can still apply for a contract with a project on one of those circuits and, based on the specifics of that project, still may get a contract…and that project may be able to connect,” she said.
Campbell says the IESO availability tables are guidelines and will point out what areas are “a little tighter than others. But no availability doesn’t necessarily mean no projects at all can connect.”
The tables show no availability on the five circuits for Brinston. The area does have the capacity though to handle 550 more megawatts of power. There are many other areas, predominately in southwestern Ontario, where the chances are higher a contract could go ahead.
Certainly this is a factor they (the companies) need to consider. In an area where there may be a lot of availability there’s certainly a much greater likelihood of there not being any barriers with the specific issue of connection (to the circuit)…lower availability is certainly one aspect that needs to be considered by a proponent,” Campbell said.
EDP Renewables and Invenergy are two of 42 companies qualified in Ontario to put in contracts. They have until Sept. 1 to decide whether to put in a request for proposal (RFP).
April 2015: surplus wind power costs Ontario millions
Energy Minister hiding his head over consumer losses due to surplus power, lots of it wind
Electricity exports cost heading for $2 billion in 2015
The continued costs to Ontario’s ratepayers for the oversupply of electricity generation in Ontario continued in April 2015; we exported another 2 terawatts (TWh) of power to our neighbours. April’s exported TWh brings exports for the first four months of 2015 to 8.65 TWh — that’s enough to supply 900,000 average Ontario ratepayers with power for a full year.
Surplus exports represented over 19% of Ontario’s total demand for the month; that figure doesn’t include curtailed wind, steamed-off nuclear or spilled hydro.
The cost (Hourly Ontario Electricity Price + Global Adjustment) to ratepayers for exported power in April was $223 million. We sold it for 1.57 cents per kilowatt hour, thereby generating only $32 million. Ontario’s electricity ratepayers had to eat $191 million in losses that will find their way to the Global Adjustment pot and the “electricity” line on our bills.
As noted in a prior article, the first quarter of the current year generated losses (costs to ratepayers) of $437 million. So now, with the April figures, those costs to date are $608 million or $135 per ratepayer.
We still have eight months left in the year: at the current pace, our bill to support surplus exports will amount to over $400 for the average ratepayer.
Wind power generation for April represented 39% of the exported volume as it produced about 850,000 MWh (megawatt hours) at an average of $123.50 per/MWh, meaning its cost of $104 million represented almost 50% of total export costs.
Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli doesn’t seem to notice our growing surplus*; however, he has directed the IESO to acquire another 500 MW of renewable energy from wind and solar in 2015, and mandated conservation of another 7 TWh by 2020.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not represent Wind Concerns Ontario policy.
Editor’s note: speaking at a wind power information evening in Finch, Ontario, on May 6th, Ontario Federation of Agriculture president Don McCabe said there is no surplus of power in Ontario. This is a lot of lost power and a lot of losses to electricity consumers—including farmers—to deny.
Not the photo the Standard-Freeholder used, of a turbine alone in a field. THIS is reality: a house and turbine near KIncardine, Ont.
U.S.-based Invenergy is trying to persuade South Dundas to reverse its unwilling host resolution and put its stamp of approval on a proposal for more wind turbines for the area.
South Dundas remains a magnet for wind power developers, despite an earlier proclamation the municipality is “not a willing host” for the controversial turbines.
Just on the heels of a presentation made by the township’s only resident turbine developer, EDP Renewables, a second firm wants in on the action. South Dundas council heard last Tuesday from James Murphy and Ryan Ralph, who were representing Invenergy, reputed to be the continent’s sixth-largest green energy entity.
Invenergy is proposing its Nine Mile Project, which would be considerably more ambitious the current South Branch project that is now operating in the Brinston area. It would also spill into North Dundas.
If developed, Nine Mile would produce between 50-90 megawatts/hr. South Branch delivers 30 megawatts, but EDP is hoping to expand its operations in the township.
Invenergy needs council’s blessing in order to arm itself with a best-case argument to get provincial approval as it competes with some 40 other companies. One of the requirements that South Dundas wants projects to satisfy is to show there is a demand for more electricity.
Invenergy has indicated by 2019, more energy will need to be produced in Ontario, reversing a current trend of selling power at loss to other jurisdictions.
Mayor Evonne Delegarde said the new council welcomes new presentations in order to analyze their individual worth.
One of the social spinoffs for hosting a turbine project is the community donations the township receives annually – $1,000 for every megawatt produced, so Nine Mile would provide $50,000 to $90,000 per year for 20 years.
As for her opinion, the mayor said the community investment would not be a factor in view of whether to accept the proposal. Several property owners have already signed up to receive $500,000 in lease payments if the project goes ahead.
NOTE: Ottawa Wind Concerns has learned that a community group opposed to the wind power project may be forming in North Stormont–we will keep you informed.
The provincial government is preparing a new law to make it easier to build and expand hydro corridors, with the Ottawa area a prime target.
Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli told a summit of energy companies in Toronto in early May that he’s working on legislation that’s mostly about adjusting the way Ontario’s main regulator for the industry, the Ontario Energy Board, works once the province sells off a majority share in Hydro One, its main transmission utility.
But part of the new law, according to the text of his speech, will “give cabinet enhanced powers to designate key transmission corridors to expedite their construction.”
Chiarelli’s spokesperson Jennifer Beaudry explained by email that the idea is to let the politicians decide what’s “in the public good” and remove a stage where the energy board makes its own determination about whether a transmission project is really needed. The regulator would still go over costs and decide who should pay what share of them, she said.
A key transmission corridor could be one that brings electricity to a remote First Nations reserve, one needed to power northern mines, or one that’s needed for “enhanced intertie capacity with neighbouring jurisdictions to support clean energy import,” the text of Chiarelli’s speech says.
And that means Ottawa, which is a major transfer point for electricity Ontario buys from Quebec’s hydro dams but where our existing wires are nearly maxed out.
“At present the firm import capability that could be relied on for all hours on the Quebec — Ontario interties is quite restricted due to transmission issues in the Ottawa area,” says a report prepared last fall by the Independent Electricity System Operator, the provincial agency that monitors and forecasts the flow of electricity around Ontario.
Lines that run through Ottawa carry power into Ontario both from northern Quebec and from the big Beauharnois dam near Montreal. Electricity doesn’t travel all that well, so a lot of the energy we use here comes from Quebec, especially in the summer.
A shortage of transmission capacity will be a big deal in the North, where the eventual development of Ring of Fire mines and related industries will take a lot of electricity. It could even affect Toronto, which has a lot of heavy-duty power lines around its outskirts but only a webwork of little ones serving its condo-packed downtown. But it’s here that the clock is really ticking.
Within five years, the agency says, there’ll be no capacity to move electricity from Quebec through Ottawa to the rest of the province unless we build hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of new power lines; all the juice we can suck in, we’ll be using locally. At a minimum, keeping the system functioning means replacing existing lines that run past backyards in Kanata and Orléans with heavier-duty ones, a $325-million project that would only keep the power supply in Ottawa stable, not give us any to spare.
The most ambitious scenario the IESO considered would cost more like $2 billion. It’s a list of things we’d have to do if Ontario wants to make a major deal to buy Quebec electricity in quantity. We’d have to do major work on just about all of Ottawa’s high-voltage lines, but especially on the ones that run through Orléans because they mainly carry electricity from an “intertie” with Quebec at a hydro dam in Masson-Angers to Ontario’s main power grid. It would also mean building a new eight-kilometre line through Kanata, connecting transfer stations at South March and Terry Fox.
As Ontario knows well by now, new electricity projects are rarely popular. Usually, they benefit other people more than those who live nearby — a wind farm is good for the company that runs it and for whoever leases or sells the land, and (arguably) for the province as a whole, but not for the neighbours who have to look at it.
Same thing with a hydro corridor. We need high-voltage wires but nobody has yet found a way to make them pretty. Plus the science is pretty compelling that they don’t pose a health risk, but there’s no convincing some people. There’s really no way that high-tension wires carrying Quebec power past your house in Ottawa’s suburbs toward Toronto are a selling point. Which is why the cabinet will want the authority to shove them down people’s throats.
James Murphy, left, and Ryan Ralph, senior manager of business development for Invenergy, make their presentation to South Dundas council May 19, 2015 for a proposed wind farm west of Brinston. The 20-25 windmill site would be west of the existing EDP Renewables’ South Branch Wind Farm. (Cornwall Newswatch/Bill Kingston)
SOUTH DUNDAS – Another company is looking to cash in on wind energy in the Municipality of South Dundas.
Representatives from Chicago-based Invenergy made a presentation to South Dundas council Tuesday night – a presentation very similar to EDP Renewables’ last month.
Spokesman James Murphy told council they’ve already secured land leases with 30 landowners for a total of 11,000 acres in South Dundas.
The company says it has paid out $500,000 to date for the leases.
“We get asked a lot, well, how big is the project? Is it big, is it small? In general, we think it’s going to be around 50-90 megawatts, using a similar unit on the South Branch (Wind Farm) project….somewhere between 20-25 positions (windmills) on that 11,000 acres,” Murphy told council.
The wind farm would be west of Brinston and south of Irish Headline Road.
Answering a question from Deputy Mayor Jim Locke on where the exact locations of the windmills would be, Murphy said that wouldn’t come until late 2016 if they were successful in their bid this year.
Murphy says they also have a smaller land footprint in North Dundas but, when they asked to make a deputation to the council there, they were refused. North Dundas is also a non-willing host. Instead, a public meeting is being held at a nearby community center.
Murphy also stressed there would be public meetings on the proposed project this summer, which has to be submitted to the government by September.
Much like EDP Renewables, Invenergy would have a community reinvestment fund.
Invenergy and EDP Renewables are both trying to woo support from council is order to score better on a points system for the request for proposal (RFP) process, despite the fact South Dundas committed to being a non-willing host in October 2013.
South Dundas listened but made no commitments Tuesday night.
The Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) is expected to outline the capacity for wind power on the hydro grid in two days (May 22) and, at that point, both companies will have a better idea how big their wind farms will be.
A recent news report stated that South Dundas council was rethinking its position of not supporting a proposed wind power generation project, partly because of the tax revenues that would come to the municipality.
Council need to reads this.
No windfall in tax revenue for Ontario communities hosting wind farms
With a cap on assessments for wind turbines, Ontario municipalities are limited in tax revenues on the multi-million-dollar power projects. Revenues work out to less than 1% of what the developers have in their money bags
Revenues no more than “Chump Change” for municipalities
Wind power developers bringing projects to Ontario’s municipalities offer various inducements to persuade politicians they will benefit from millions of dollars. Like the landowners signing leases for turbines, money is frequently the reason municipal politicians support wind power development and locating projects locally.
In Ontario, local politicians have no real power to support or deny those projects, and also, little ability to generate a real community benefit due to the Green Energy and Green Economy Act (GEA). It doesn’t matter what the capital value of an industrial wind turbine (IWT) is, or what they levy in local realty taxes as the provincial government has set the taxable value! Former Minister of Finance, Dwight Duncan decreed (one year before resigning) IWTs would be assessed by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) at a maximum of $40,000 per megawatt (MW). That translates to tax revenue averaging $1,000/2,000 per MW, based on local industrial mill rates.
My research indicates Ontario has the lowest assessed value per/MW capacity of all provinces.
Ontario:
The 2014 3rd Quarter update from the OPA claimed they had contracted for 5,697 MW of wind capacity. Payment per MW hour for wind generated power averages $123.50/MWh.
Using an average of $1,500 per MW for the OPA-contracted 5,697 MW of wind means Ontario host municipalities will generate about $8.5 million annual realty taxes. (5,697 X $1,500 = $8.5 million)
Those 5,697 MW will produce energy at 30% of their capacity producing cash for the developers of $1.8 billion (5,697 X 30% X 8760 [hours per annum] X $123.50 = $1.8 billion) Eighty percent (80%) of the time the power will be surplus to Ontario’s demand.1. Tax revenues represent less than 1% of developers’ revenue.
Nova Scotia:
Nova Scotia’s legislature set the annual price for their realty taxes at $5,500 per MW “plus a percentage of $5,500.00 equal to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for Canada at the end of the calendar year ending in the immediately preceding municipal taxation year relative to the Consumer Price Index for Canada at the end of the 2005 calendar year”.
If Nova Scotia had contracted for the 5,697 MW the OPA has in Ontario, realty tax revenues would be in excess of $31 million. (5,697 X $5,500 = $31.3 million)
In Nova Scotia those 5,697 MW of wind turbines operating at 30% of capacity would be paid an an average of $100 MWh and generate $1.5 billion. Tax revenues would represent slightly more than 2% of revenue for the developers.
British Columbia:
For British Columbia realty taxes applicable to farms are applied to wind developments which presumably means assessment of the capital cost (depreciating) of about $1.5 million per MW. Specific information was difficult to locate; however, what I found indicates realty taxes appear to be approximately $14K/MW and the price paid for generation is $105 per/MWh.
Using the limited amount of information available and applying it to the Ontario contracted 5,697 MW of capacity; in BC the tax revenue would be $80 million annually (5,697 X $14K = $80 million) and at $105 per MWh would generate $1.6 billion annually for the developers. Taxes would represent 5% of the revenue generated for the developers.
Alberta:
It was almost impossible to locate assessment values for wind turbines in Alberta except for one reference in a report from the Greengate Power Corporation posted on the University of Calgary site. That report claimed a 300 MW wind development would pay municipal taxes of $5 million annually which indicates a realty tax of about $16K per MW.
Using that information and applying it to Ontario’s 5,697MW of contracted capacity, suggests annual tax revenue for municipalities would be $91 million. In Alberta the wind developers must sell their production via the spot market and in 2013 a BNN article suggested they earned an average of $54.97 per MWh which translates to annual revenue of $820 million for the developers. In Alberta realty taxes would therefore represent 11% of the revenue generated by the developers.
Summary:
With Ontario municipalities receiving so little for hosting industrial wind turbines it is surprising the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) when faced with any kind of opposition would issue a press release that claims: “Right now there are literally thousands of Ontarians participating in the province’s ground-breaking clean energy economy. Communities across this province — from Chatham-Kent to Frontenac Island, Tillsonburg to Niagara — stand to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in direct benefits from wind energy projects.”
MPAC’s 2014 annual report claims they assess and classify “more than five million properties with an estimated total value of $2.2 trillion.”The assessed value of the contracted 5,697 industrial wind turbines at $40K per MW gives them a total value of $228 million or .0001% of total assessed values versus a likely capital cost approaching $8.5 billion, or 4% of MPAC’s total value!
So, Ontario’s wind developers walk away with an estimated $1.8 billion annually and $36 billion over the 20-year term of the contracts, while Ontario’s hosting municipalities have to make do with chump change of $8.5 million annually, and only $170 million over the full terms of those contracts.
Far from enjoying millions in cash windfall, Ontario’s municipalities got stuck with the worst possible deal.
Land owners need to be socially responsible when deciding to sign leases for wind turbines, Wind Concerns Ontario tells Ontario Federation of Agriculture president
The following is a letter sent by Wind Concerns Ontario president Jane Wilson to OFA president Don McCabe, in response to remarks made by Mr. McCabe at a wind farm information meeting in Finch, Ontario. Several of Mr. McCabe’s comments to the audience, such as that there is no surplus of power in Ontario, were not correct, WCO said in the letter.
As well, while Mr. McCabe’s advice to landowners to “get a lawyer” is sound, Wilson said, the attitude that landowners need to concentrate only on getting everything they want in a lease is isolationist and archaic, and is helping to divide Ontario’s rural and small-town communities.
“Not one word was said about responsibility to community, and neighbours. This [attitude] does not represent the view of the contemporary and socially responsible farm operators that we work with; they are professionals who believe they are part of their communities and who are aware of—or at least consider—the effects of their actions on others,” Wilson said.
The letter was sent to Mr. McCabe, and the Board of Directors for the Ontario Federation of Agriculture.
Dear Mr. McCabe:
It was interesting to meet you last week in Finch, Ontario at the Lions’ Club event, where we both spoke, along with Mr. Levy of CanWEA.
I was relieved to hear your strong advice to those attending and contemplating signing a lease with a wind power developer, to “get a lawyer, get a lawyer, get a lawyer.” This is excellent advice: as you know, these contracts typically contain dozens of pages of various clauses outlining requirements and limitations…many people do not understand what they are being asked to sign.
I was disappointed, however, in other aspects of your presentation. First, there were a couple of statements made that are not correct and may even be misleading.
Power surplus in Ontario: in my presentation I had suggested that more wind power projects were not necessary, especially not for a form of power generation that is intermittent, produced out-of-phase with demand and is expensive, causing Ontario electricity rates to rise. You countered by saying that Ontario has no surplus of power. This is not correct: the Ontario Energy Minister himself admits that Ontario has surplus power and also says that the province will have a surplus for years to come. See his quotes and the forecast for power rates in a Globe and Mail article here.
“Net metering”: you told the audience that they should arrange in their lease to share in the wind power produced by any turbines on their land. This is not correct—it is unlikely one could get power from the wind turbine on a farm, and moreover, it would be in violation of the contract the wind power developer has with the Ontario government to obtain the Feed In Tariff to do that.
Turbine noise: you suggested to the audience that if the noise from turbines were to bother them, they could make sure that there is a clause in the lease so that the power developer would have to address that. This is extremely unlikely; at present, there are thousands of noise complaints in Ontario that go unresolved by either the developer or the Ministry of the Environment.
Community input to power projects: In response to several questions from the floor, you did advise people to go to the government website on the new Large Renewable Power Request for Proposal process, but you also suggested to at least one audience member that there is nothing communities can do, if a power proposal comes forward. That is not correct: people can work with their municipal governments, members of their community, and also choose not to sign the agreement required of adjacent property owners.
Contracts: I believe you also suggested to a farm owner who had signed a contract/option and was now having second thoughts that there was nothing he could do. This also is not correct, and would have been another opportunity for you to advise him to “get a lawyer, get a lawyer, get a lawyer.”
That brings me to the second area of disappointment in your presentation: the overarching theme of your remarks was that if people are going to sign a lease for a wind turbine project they should make certain that they get concessions from the power developer that benefit them. There was not a single mention in your remarks of the need for responsible consideration of other members of one’s community, including fellow farm operators, and neighbours.
This was a very narrow view that demonstrates no balance and instead indicates an archaic, “I can do whatever I want on my land” view. This does not represent the view of the contemporary and socially responsible farm operators that we work with; they are professionals who believe they are part of their communities and who are aware of—or at least consider—the effects of their actions on others.
Our concern with this isolationist view of farm ownership is that it will further divide Ontario’s rural and small-town communities.
OFA needs to clarify its position on this matter, and further, consider advising your membership that when it comes to deciding whether to participate in a wind power project, the responsible course of action is to balance their financial opportunities with the economic, health and social needs of others around them.
We would be pleased to meet with the OFA Board to discuss our concerns.
Ottawa Wind Concerns 