While Ottawa’s Bob Chiarelli, Ontario Minister of Energy, insists that paying high and selling low is a good economic strategy (meanwhile inflicting dramatic increases in bills to consumers), economic analysts don’t seem to agree. Here from Forbes. com is a view of Ontario’s handling of the electricity sector.
Ontario’s high electricity prices are bad for business
Jude Clemente, Forbes/Energy, March 30, 2016
“Ontario is probably the worst electricity market in the world,” Pierre-Olivier Pineau, University of Montreal
Ontario’s auditor general just reported that the province paid an extra $37 billion for electricity from 2006-2014, likely the most ludicrous energy story that I’ve ever read (here). Ontario has gone from having some of the most affordable electricity in North America to having some of the most expensive. From 2013-2015 alone, industrial electricity rates increased 16%.
In 2003, the provincial government decided to phase-out coal-fired generation by 2007 (later extended to 2014), perhaps the most cost effective source of power.
This necessitated investment in new sources of electricity. For example, more expensive wind has provided less than 4% of Ontario’s power but accounts for 20% of the cost of electricity. In January, Ontario Power Generation unveiled plans for a $13 billion refurbishment of four nuclear reactors, which could crush ratepayers to recover the total costs.
Ministry of the Environment lawyer steps in as Prince Edward County citizens appealed for a stay of unauthorized construction activities in endangered turtle habitat
Wind Concerns Ontario
Massive clearing of vegetation in Prince Edward County wetland area. This project is still under appeal, but the developer has gone ahead [Photo: APPEC]
April 6, 2016, Picton, Ontario —STATEMENT FROM ALLIANCE TO PROTECT PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY (APPEC)
First and foremost our great thanks to everyone who responded to our call to attend the Court of Appeal hearing. The courtroom was filled to capacity with no seats left empty. The numbers left an impression on all present from the judge to the security guards who were curious about what case all the commotion was about. It was a packed courtroom by anyones’ standards and we thank all of you who made this possible. Our special thanks to Mayor Quaiff and Warren Howard of Wind Concerns Ontario.
However the outcome of today’s hearing is not what we had hoped for. On our arrival we had hoped that Justice Katherine van Rensburg would hear our appeal and our new evidence including aerial photography of the destruction that has occurred at the White Pines project site since WPD began clearing vegetation two days ago, as depicted in one photograph attached.
Instead Sylvia Davis, lawyer for the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, cited a ruling from over fifty years ago that only a panel of three judges could hear an appeal of this nature. It became clear at that point that the motion would not be heard until after the legal matter of whether this was properly before the court had been dealt with, with a potentially unfavourable decision. Rather than spend considerable time and money on legal wrangling the decision was made to withdraw our motion for a stay on all physical activity at the White Pines project site. The motion was withdrawn on consent of all parties and without costs.
We have received the written reasons from the Environmental Review Tribunal for its original refusal of our stay motion. We will immediately be going to the Tribunal to once again request a stay. As the saying goes when one door closes, another opens. More information will follow soon.
Lastly, there is a short article on the Wind Concerns website with another photograph of the after-effects of vegetation clearing at www.windconcernsontario.ca
Regards,
Orville Walsh
President, APPEC
For more information on this project and to donate toward legal fees, please go towww.savethesouthshore.org
We present a collection of stories that review the manner in which strategies that are supposedly positive for the environment have been enacted (usually without any sort of cost-benefit or full impact analysis), and what the results are to date.
From Terence Corcoran’s review in The Financial Post, to a review of German energy policy (this is a sad, sad story worthy of Dickens), an article in Prince Edward County’s Wellington Times (one of the last independent newspapers in Canada) on a wind power developer’s arrogance, and last, an opinion on what the real effect on the local environment green energy policies are in reality, the collection deserves a read … and consideration by the Ontario government.
Will they? In the words of the team of academics lead by the University of Ottawa’s Stewart Fast, writing recently about the disastrous implementation of the Green Energy Act on Ontario communities, “Our recommendations will unfortunately remain unaddressed, without further consideration or assessment of the lessons that could be learned.” [Fast et al. Lessons learned from Ontario wind energy disputes, January, 2016]
Terence Corcoran, The Financial Post, “Clean, green, and catastrophic.” (Note: our Parker Gallant provided some figures for this article.)
Handelsblatt (Global edition) “How to kill an industry”. (Thanks to energy economist Robert Lyman in Ottawa for sending this in.)
Rick Conroy, The Wellington Times, “There’s always a catch.” (“The wolf has been sent to find out what’s killing all the lambs …” Conroy writes.)
Last, this letter to the editor of Ontario Farmer, excerpted here.
“Off-grid will make a bad situation worse for reluctant grid payees”
A farming friend recently took me on a “crop tour” of rural businesses that are partially or fully off-grid. We saw a sawmill, a pressed-steel manufacturer, a maker of wood-burning stoves, a cabinet-maker and an ethanol plant. Finding it progressively more difficult to remain profitable in the agricultural business with skyrocketing electrical costs, my friend is seriously looking at more cost-effective alternatives. If going off-grid works for others, perhaps it will work for him.
“Off-grid” means that these business owners are no longer victims of usurious hydro rates the Ontario Green Energy Act (GEA) has imposed on the vast majority who obtain electricity from Hydro One and other such utility companies. Are these enterprises trailblazers illuminating a path to greater energy independence for other beleaguered hydro ratepayers?
Or are they creating an even greater financial burden for those who remain on the grid?
And what may be the environmental impact if a great many businesses follow suit?
Operating the Ontario power grid has become exorbitantly expensive under the GEA. It is becoming ever more expensive as greater numbers of windmills spring up to further sully our rural landscapes. … Operating costs of a centralized generation and distribution system are borne by all users. The more users there are, the less share of fixed costs each user pays. Businesses fleeing to off-grid energy alternatives leave fewer users on-grid bearing fixed costs; thus, each user pays more. While going off-grid may financially benefit those who do it, greater economic burden falls on those remaining on-grid, and most have no choice.
Fossil fuels are the primary energy source for off-grid users. Electricity to run their businesses must be generated by some sort of power plant, typically an internal combustion engine driving and electrical generator. It’s far removed from the most cost-effective or environmentally friendly way to generate and distribute electricity —the way we used to do it — but the GEA has made grid power so prohibitively expensive off-grid generation has become economically viable for major energy users.
Community said ‘no’ to giant wind power plant and Mayor aims to fight for their wishes … and sense
North Frontenac Mayor Ron Higgins told the audience for a noon-hour public affairs show yesterday that he is “game” for a fight against wind power projects … and he is gathering steam among other municipalities to “bring it on.”
Although North Frontenac missed a contract in the recent announcement by the IESO, he is under no illusion that his community, where the majority of residents are opposed to a wind power project, is safe.
“Those bids” will just roll over into the next round, he said, and his community is not only ready, they are striking out for change. Last week, North Frontenac Council passed a resolution asking the provincial government to make municipal support a mandatory requirement in the new bid process, not just a means to score higher in points for wind power developers.
In spite of declarations by more than 90 communities in Ontario that they were “Not A Willing Host” to the power projects, the Independent Electricity Systems Operator (IESO) awarded contracts to unwilling communities anyway.
Higgins’ issue is not only are community wishes overruled by the current process, the fact is wind power doesn’t live up to the hype. “It isn’t really ‘green’,” he said, citing studies which list concerns about the need for fossil-fuel back up and the possibility that greenhouse gas emissions actually increase with wind power.
The Ontario government never did any studies on cost-benefit analysis, Higgins said, echoing two Auditors General in Ontario, and the real impacts of industrial-scale wind power development are not known. But there are enough concerns about damage to the environment, health impacts due to the noise and vibration, and the alteration to North Frontenac’s scenic landscape to worry him.
“Here in North Frontenac,” he said, “we never take action without studying everything … the province didn’t do that.”
Rubbing salt in the wounds of the communities who just got notice of wind power contracts forced on them, despite unwilling host declarations, Energy Minister now says process will allow for input earlier in the process. (We’re still not hearing communities can say “No.”)
Just a little bit more “input”? But Bob still doesn’t want to hear you say “no.”
simcoe.com, March 28, 2016
By Jenni Dunning Barrie Examiner
Towns to have input ahead of solar, wind farm decisions
A few weeks after the province approved a wind energy project in Clearview Township, sparking an appeal, Ontario’s energy minister said municipalities will soon be asked for input ahead of future decisions.
“There was a problem with particular large wind and solar farms. There was not enough of an alignment of what they were doing and what the municipalities wanted,” said Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli.
“We are in the process now… It involves much more communication with the municipality. It (will be) almost impossible for (contractors) to win a contract without having participation with a municipality.”
Chiarelli clarified that “participation” referred to approval from a municipality, adding all contractors will be required to show proof they consulted municipalities. One wind energy and 13 solar projects have been approved in Simcoe County, according to the provincial Renewable Energy Projects Listing.
The Clearview project is the only wind farm. There are five solar energy projects in Springwater Township (three of which are in Midhurst), four in Tay Township (three of which are in Waubaushene), three in Orillia, and one in Oro-Medonte.
Chiarelli said he expects the ministry to announce more projects “in a month or two.”
Springwater Township Mayor Bill French said he has noticed the province has slowly started asking municipalities for more input on solar and wind projects in the past year.
They have been asked to use a scoring system to rank their support for proposed projects, he said.
“We always thought there should be a final approval process at the municipal level. It should’ve always been that way,” he said. “We’re quite welcome to that change in legislation.”
French said the township has been concerned when “fairly good agricultural land” was chosen as the location for solar farms.
“The ones that are approved, you can’t turn back the clock on those ones,” he said, adding once municipalities are more involved, Springwater will likely approve energy projects in areas with steep slopes or on smaller properties.
“Multi-acre ones, that’s going to be much more of a challenge,” he said. “We have acres and acres of rooftops around. That’s where solar panels belong.”
Collingwood Mayor Sandra Cooper said she has heard the promise of more municipal involvement from Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne.
“I’m hopeful. I just have not seen it thus far,” she said. “Municipalities have been sending the message for quite some time — we need to be part of the process.”
Cooper and the rest of Collingwood council voted last month to legally oppose plans to build a wind farm with eight turbines west of Stayner, near the Collingwood Regional Airport. The town is concerned about the possibility of a plane hitting a turbine.
Cooper said the province made a “snap decision” to approve a wind farm despite of this possibility.
By allowing municipalities more say in the approval process, they can help stop decisions that may negatively affect residents, said Oro-Medonte Mayor Harry Hughes.
For example, a couple in the township built a home about five years ago that ended up being surrounded by a solar farm, he said.
“If municipalities had a say in it, that would never have happened,” he said. “Residents expect their municipal council to have some protection for their property.”
When municipalities are more involved, they can demand companies complete up-to-date soil testing to avoid solar projects taking up quality agricultural land, he added.
The province also does not require companies to repair local roads if damage is caused by solar or wind projects, but some have anyway in Oro-Medonte, said Hughes. …
Earth Hour: cruel irony in Ontario where government policy is actually causing poverty and hardship
Earth Hour 2016 is tomorrow, March 19, 2016 from 8.30 PM to 9.30 PM when all the world is encouraged to turn off their lights for an hour of symbolic action. Specifically the goal is: “Earth Hour aims to encourage an interconnected global community to share the opportunities and challenges of creating a sustainable world.”
This is an admirable objective – everyone wants to do their best for the environment – but the truth is, much depends on how sustainability is positioned by politicians.
In Ontario the OEB (Ontario Energy Board) noted in a 45 page report dated December 22, 2014: “Using LIM1. as a measuring tool, and relying on Statistics Canada household data, Ontario has 713,300 low-income households. The OESP is estimated to reach 571,000. This estimate recognizes that not all low-income households in the province pay their electricity bills directly (i.e., utilities included in rent).”That report led to the introduction of the OESP or Ontario Electricity Support Program start-up on January 1, 2016, expected to cost between $175 and $225 million, paid for by those 3.9 million households who don’t qualify for the OESP.
So did the Ontario government simply not understand creation of the Green Energy & Green Economy Act (GEA) would result in so many low-income households? It is now apparent the advent of the GEA played a major role, by raising the cost of the production of electricity by well over 70% since its enactment. The push for renewables in the form of industrial wind turbines, solar panels, etc., which require back-up from gas plants due to the intermittent and unreliable nature of renewables, added billions in costs. The transmission builds to bring wind and solar power to the grid added billions more and, coupled with the other billions spent trying to convince us to conserve, added even more costs.
The addition of almost 10,000 MW (so far) of renewable generation at prices over market impacted disposable income for all Ontarians living at, or close to, minimum wage and for many others living on fixed incomes. The other result of adding renewable power is that Ontario is now in the position of having surplus power generated at the wrong time of the year and night when demand is low. This surplus must be either sold off (exported), curtailed (wind and solar) or steamed-off (nuclear). Additionally, ratepayers and taxpayers are charged for the ideasNB: related to conservation such as paying for grants for electric vehicles and their charging stations.
March 13, 2016 is an example: it was a day when the sun shone and the wind was blowing. Ontario demand was low reaching only 320,000 megawatt hours (MWh) while generation, coupled with curtailed wind, idling gas plants, spilled hydro and even curtailed solar along with all of the distribution connected (Dx) power (principally wind and solar) was about 463,000 Mwh2.. Ontario’s ratepayers needed only 68% of that 463,000 MWh, so the other 32% was either exported or curtailed (to avoid blackouts) while being billed to Ontario ratepayers. Production costs (without the other items tossed into the “Global Adjustment pot) were over $100/per MWh, meaning the 143,000 MWh surplus picked ratepayers’ pockets for more than $14 million or $2.85 per ratepayer for just one day. (Bob Chiarelli, our Minister of Energy, would probably say that was just the cost of a “Timmies”!)
In 2015, Glen Murray, Ontario’s Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, said Earth Hour “Every passing year it becomes more infectious. It’s actually really doing what it intended to do, which is to get into the popular culture.”
Minister Murray should note we have turned off the lights, not because we want to but because we can’t afford to “keep them on.”
It appears to this Ontario ratepayer that what is really “infectious” is the Ontario government’s ability to create “energy poverty” for hundreds of thousands of Ontario’s households and, instead of promoting sustainability, it has instead driven many to a situation where they now have to decide whether to “heat or eat”.
Hardly the lofty goal that Earth Hour aspires to, and clearly not what well-meaning citizens wanted to happen.
Power company looking for “incentives” to continue wind power project — that means taxpayer subsidies
A line of turbines on metal lattice legs catch the breeze at the Cowley Ridge wind farm in southern Alberta. The 23-year-old facility, Canada’s first commercial wind project, is being decommissioned.Ted Rhodes / Calgary Herald
The oldest commercial wind power facility in Canada has been shut down and faces demolition after 23 years of transforming brisk southern Alberta breezes into electricity — and its owner says building a replacement depends on the next moves of the provincial NDP government.
TransAlta Corp. said Tuesday the blades on 57 turbines at its Cowley Ridge facility near Pincher Creek have already been halted and the towers are to be toppled and recycled for scrap metal this spring. The company inherited the now-obsolete facility, built between 1993 and 1994, as part of its $1.6-billion hostile takeover of Calgary-based Canadian Hydro Developers Inc. in 2009.
“TransAlta is very interested in repowering this site. Unfortunately, right now, it’s not economically feasible,” Wayne Oliver, operations supervisor for TransAlta’s wind operations in Pincher Creek and Fort Macleod, said in an interview.
“We’re anxiously waiting to see what incentives might come from our new government. . . . Alberta is an open market and the wholesale price when it’s windy is quite low, so there’s just not the return on investment in today’s situation. So, if there is an incentive, we’d jump all over that.”
In February, TransAlta president and chief executive Dawn Farrell said the company’s plans to invest in hydroelectric, wind, solar and natural gas cogeneration facilities in Alberta were on hold until the details of the province’s climate-change plans are known.
“We cannot make any major investment decisions in this market until we have more clarity around the policy environment and the policy recommendations turn into actual law and we know what the market is actually going to be like,” she said.
Last November, Premier Rachel Notley’s government vowed that coal-fired power plants would be forced to shut down or be emissions-free by 2030. Coal power companies in Alberta, including TransAlta, are looking for compensation.
Jean-François Nolet, vice-president of policy and communications at the Canadian Wind Energy Association, said Tuesday his organization has been included in the NDP government’s consultations and is optimistic that changes will be made to encourage wind power growth.
“What the investors need to see is more certainty in the market,” he said, adding that it “just makes sense” that a wind farm such as Cowley Ridge that is already connected to the grid and has a proven wind resource is rebuilt to continue to provide renewable energy.
Read the full story here: Calgary Herald, March 15, 2016
Re: New Eastern Ontario wind farms a betrayal, mayors near Ottawa say, March 11.
Home ownership is the biggest investment a person can make. Many people depend on the value of their homes to underwrite their futures, whether it be generating capital for their kids’ educations, serving as a stepping stone to a better home, or even financing their retirement. Folks who choose to live in rural areas already face challenges in marketing their properties, compared to their city cousins.
With the looming prospect of giant wind farms in their backyards, they are now told they must accept unanticipated decreases in their property values without complaint because “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” Rural dwellers also pay comparatively huge electricity transmission costs – and, ironically, will likely continue to do so even with the gargantuan structures towering over their homes. It is also likely that their municipal tax burden will not be adjusted to reflect the decrease in their property values.
It is grossly unfair for an all-powerful government authority to callously steal rural homeowners’ futures so that a corporate entity can profit from huge government subsidies and distant cities can meet their rapacious energy consumption needs. At the very least, these folks should be compensated for their loss.
Perhaps a good starting point would be to waive the “welcome tax” levied by the provincial government on home sales for those located within a set radius of wind farm installations, thus boosting the marketability of affected properties. Another measure would be to give these homeowners a discounted rate on their electric bills, or even the same remuneration provided to the farmers who profit from having such installations on their lands.
Four renewable energy projects located in Stormont, Dundas, Glengarry will be offered contracts by Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator.
So far, at least one township is unhappy with the decision.
EDP Renewables Canada Ltd. has applied for permission to erect an on-shore wind farm in North Stormont. The organization began the Nation Rise project in 2012 with a 60-metre meteorological tower. Since then it has secured more than 4,000 hectares (10,000 acres) through land agreements with approximately 40 local landowners.
However, the Township of North Stormont released a statement last week where it issued a reminder that council voted on July 28 to not support any of the proposed projects within the municipality – including Nation Rise.
Even without the support of the township as a willing host, the IESO still awarded the 100,000 megawatt project a contract.
“The municipality will continue to work in its capacity as a commenting agency in regard to renewable energy projects and the necessary approvals that are required by the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change and the building code,” said the release.
MPP Jim McDonell also expressed his displeasure in the project by questioning the Minister of Energy on the government’s empty commitment to listen to municipalities and their residents who oppose these projects.
“Just before I asked my question, the Liberals said they listened to municipalities,” said McDonell.
“They clearly didn’t. The people of North Stormont and the Township of North Stormont said a clear no to wind farms in their township, rejecting the $9-million incentive offered by the developer in exchange for municipal support.
“This approval makes a mockery of due process and consultation.”
McDonell said he wouldn’t let the subject drop and has filed a Notice of Dissatisfaction with the minister’s answer.
“The minister will have to answer me a week from Tuesday in detail,” said McDonell. “The people of North Stormont deserve a voice when the government denies them one.”
The Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) last week announced contracts for five wind power projects, for a total of 300 megawatts of new wind power generation.
According to Ontario’s Auditor General, the province is already in a situation of a surplus of power, and selling off the extra at a loss, a good portion of which is due to wind power.
Two Ottawa area communities were named in the contract announcement. The Municipality of Nation and Township of Champlain were tipped for a 32-megawatt project by RES Canada, and North Stormont is to get a 100-megawatt project by EDP Renewables. EDP Renewables (head office Spain) operates the South Branch wind power project in Brinston, which it purchased from Germany-based Prowind.
Citizens of Nation/Champlain who want to get involved should contact Save The Nation/Sauvons La Nation here.
In a recent paper prepared by eight Ontario academics (Fast et al, Nature Energy, January 2016), Ontario’s procurement process for large-scale renewable power projects came under fire for ignoring community concerns.
News reports following last week’s contract announcement quote local mayors as saying they feel “betrayed” by the government action–Dutton-Dunwich mayor Cameron McWilliam was quoted as saying “We live in the Province of Toronto, not the Province of Ontario.” His municipality conducted a full, legal referendum which resulted in 84% saying NO to the wind power project–they are getting a 57-megawatt project by U.S.-based Invenergy.
The municipalities do not even know where the turbines for the proposed power projects will go, as that information is not part of the bid process.
Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli, who told municipalities that it would be “impossible” for a power developer to get a contract if a community did not support it, now says, “They should have known” we never gave them a veto. He describes the power projects, bid and constructed by private corporations, as “public infrastructure.”
Ottawa Wind Concerns 