Parker Gallant on Ontario’s “smart grid”: what’s been achieved?

Tags

, , , , , ,

Reprinted from Wind Concerns Ontario today:

On November 23, 2010, Ontario’s then Minister of Energy, Brad Duguid, issued a directive via an Order In Council to the Ontario Energy Board (OEB), with instructions on the “smart grid”:

“… it is desirable that the Province and the Ontario Energy Board move forward together with a plan to implement the advanced information exchange systems and equipment that together comprise the Smart Grid (“Smart Grid”), as defined in the amendments to the Electricity Act, 1998 made by the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009…”

   The Duguid directive was a direct result of the Dwight Duncan directive of 2004 to the OEB instructing them to arrange the installation of “smart meters” throughout the province. 

   Co-incidentally (noted by Tom Adams), the Duguid directive is dated the same day as the e-mail exchange between Alicia Johnston (formerly a senior political staffer for Energy Minister Brad Duguid, later promoted to the Premier’s Office) and Ben Chin (a senior Ontario Power Authority executive).  That e-mail exchange contained Ms Johnston’s suggestion to engage Tyler Hamilton, a  contributor to Toronto Star, as an “expert” to counter the  Adams and Gallant duo who “are killing me” ; Chin agreed. Shortly after, Hamilton received a contract from the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) for a report on the smart grid.

    The fact is, the Independent Electricity System Operator or IESO had already started work on the “smart grid” as noted in the Financial Post article on July 6, 2010 — costs of development were estimated at $1.6 billion.  IESO had awarded a contract to IBM according to a January 15, 2007 press release; the purpose of the contract was defined as:  “the development and operation of Ontario’s Meter Data Management/Repository (MDM/R).”

A culture of conservation

The MDM/R is explained as: “a core part of Ontario’s Smart Metering Initiative to drive a culture of conservation, enabling the billing of Time-of-Use rates and encouraging consumers to shift more of their energy use to off-peak periods.” The initiative would apply to 4.7 million customers of local distribution companies, involving more than “100 million transactions every day.”

   More than six years later, that “Repository” has yet to generate reports on either shifting consumer habits or “imbedded generation.” (Embedded or distributed generation is usually a small scale production of power connected within the distribution network and not having direct access to the transmission network. These generators are typically located close to the electricity consumer.)

   But that hasn’t stopped IESO from awarding IBM yet another five-year contract for $68.5 million for the same “repository” with an option to extend the contract seven to ten years. With an estimated 100 million data feeds daily from “smart meters” one would expect that data to be accessible to determine what production comes from embedded generators such as rooftop or ground-mounted solar, to reinforce the “culture of conservation” and identify shifts in consumer habits. 

  Is this a missed opportunity for a cost/benefit analysis?

  On July 16 of this year, Energy Minister  Bob Chiarelli arranged a press release about conservation and claimed that “Ontario has saved billions of dollars through conservation, and we have a clear opportunity to do more. By investing in conservation before new generation, where cost-effective, we can save ratepayers money and give consumers new technology to track and control energy use.”

  What caught my eye in that press release were the endorsements: they were not from the usual climate change chorus such as Environmental Defence, CAPE,or the Ontario Clean Air Alliance. The last one was  “Sheldon Levy, President, Ryerson University.”  What would possess the President of Ryerson University to jump on this band wagon? 

  A month later, we have the answer:  on August 26, 2013  a news release announced that Ryerson University’s Centre for Urban Energy (CUE) “will build an innovative smart grid laboratory” with support from the province.  The press release doesn’t say how much the province is coughing up but does say “Building a smarter grid is an important part of the Ontario government’s plan to modernize the electricity system in the province and provide clean, reliable and affordable power to consumers.”  One can assume President levy’s endorsement of the July conservation announcement was sought by the Ministry as a condition of support for  the smart grid laboratory.  CUE was launched in 2010 with $7 million in grants from taxpayer-owned Hydro One, Toronto Hydro and the Ontario Power Authority.

  A  Globe and Mail article dated October 17, 2012, called “The tricky business of funding a university” carried the following comments about Ryerson’s CUE:

“Some schools have tiptoed the line successfully. Toronto’s Ryerson University launched its Centre for Urban Energy (CUE) two years ago using $7-million in contributions from three partners – Hydro One, Toronto Hydro and the Ontario Power Authority – and is now hoping to enlist new collaborators such as Siemens and General Electric.”

   It appears that President Levy knows exactly how to “tiptoe the line.” CUE’s intentions to collaborate with GE and Siemens are also interesting.  An announcement by Minister Chiarelli on July 2, 2013  indicates that the $50-million “Smart Grid” fund has already provided grants to GE, Siemens and IBM.

   Just asking: did the grants to GE and Siemens carry a proviso that they collaborate with CUE and did they both seek those grants?  It is not clear why IBM would need a grant as they have been awarded two long-term, multi-million dollar contracts from IESO.  The press release indicates the IBM grant was to create a centre “that will use and analyze smart meter data” which is what they are already supposed to be doing for IESO under the terms of the contract(s)!

Government grants to huge corporations

   So, we hand out grants to multi-billion dollar corporations such as GE, Siemens and IBM and  award them government contracts.  The first two entities are entrenched in the renewable energy business (turbines and blade manufacturing) so, to an extent they are dependent on commitments to more wind power by the Ministry of Energy. And, IBM won two contracts related to the data analysis of 4.7 million smart meters installed throughout the province.

  (I checked the Ontario Lobbyist Registry and could only find GE with registered lobbyists.)

   As noted above, the original estimate to create the smart grid was $1.6 billion, to be paid by Ontario’s ratepayers.  IESO stick-handled the first smart grid rate application through the OEB and ratepayers have paid for it since May 1, 2013.  It is included, but hidden, with the delivery costs charged by your local distribution company (LDC).  It is a charge of .79 cents per month and referred to as a “Smart Metering Entity charge.”  Your LDC will collect this for the next five and a half years.  Doing the math on this rate hike indicates that it will cover $245 million of that $1.6 billion —so be prepared for further “hidden” increases as spending is ramped up. 

   As noted, the MDM/R definition it is really all about conservation and enabling those 72 LDCs to bill on a Time-of-Use basis.  Those “smart meters” and “smart grid” will cost ratepayers $4 billion and will not produce one kilowatt of new power.  I suspect that Environmental Commissioner Gord Miller doesn’t consider the above costs or the costs of the smart meters, when he presents his annual report to the Minister of the Environment.  The Commissioner’s cost/benefit study uses only the annual spending of the Ontario Power Authority (media advertising, free fridge pickup, coupons to purchase CFL bulbs, etc.) which paints the cost of “conservation” as only three cents per kilowatt hour. 

   In addition,  a posting on Scott Luft’s website indicates that time-of use pricing has shifted consumers’ energy use to what used to be “off-peak” periods (noted as an objective of the MDT/R). As a result, those periods have now become “peak” demand periods for ordinary consumers, beginning at 7 PM, rather than mid-day.  Ontario’s ratepayers are now trained to eat our supper and wash our clothes later, not because we want to, but because electricity has become so costly we only use it during the off-peak hours!

   Perhaps the Dalton McGuinty government should have simply doubled the price of electricity when they came to power in 2003 and we would have immediately started to conserve.   Think of the money we could have saved, the countryside we would not have despoiled with industrial wind turbines, the harm to health not caused, the birds and bats not killed, and the property values that would not have fallen!

   Too bad politicians don’t grasp the simple law of supply and demand.

 

Parker Gallant.

September 11, 2013

The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent Wind Concerns Ontario policy.

Co-operators Insurance responds to comments on grant to wind power plant investors

Ottawa Wind Concerns's avatarWIND CONCERNS ONTARIO: On WordPress

You recall that it was announced last week, The Co-operators Insurance company’s Foundation gavce a grant of $13,000 to a “co-operative” called Wintergreen, which is a partner in a wind power project at Ernestown, Ontario (near Kingston/Bath).
We recognize this “co-operative” approach as a way to get more points with the Ontario government in its approval process for large-scale wind power projects; some WCO members have written to the Co-operators–which has a history of supporting rural communities in Canada–to express their disappointment in a grant going to a wind power project, when these projects are so disastrous for Ontario communities and residents.
This is the response that some Co-operators clients have received.
You can email the Co-operators at service@cooperators.ca
Thank you for taking the time to communicate your concerns to us.
The Co-operators Co-operative Development Program (CDP) was established in 1992 to support emerging and expanding Canadian co-operatives and through…

View original post 205 more words

Dear Minister Chiarelli: I won’t produce any power either

Ottawa Wind Concerns's avatarWIND CONCERNS ONTARIO: On WordPress

Stipula_fountain_pen

September 9, 2013

[Tongue in Cheek Letter]

The Honourable Bob Chiarelli, Minister of Energy,

Dear Minister Chiarelli:

It has come to my attention that the Independent Electricity System Operator will start paying industrial wind developers for not producing any electricity, starting on September 11, 2013.  I understand that they could possibly receive as much as $200,000 per megawatt of installed power for not producing that electricity.

This leads me to believe that I could also be persuaded to not produce any electricity in order to obtain the benefits of that program.  I would start small and perhaps not produce electricity for say 2 megawatts, which would mean a payment of $400,000 per year. In a few years I could expand and not produce electricity for, say, 10 megawatts.

I understand that IESO put up meteorological stations to determine what electricity is not produced and that these stations are also paid…

View original post 404 more words

Cavan-Monaghan councillor: my suggestion to you is take the turbines somewhere else

Ottawa Wind Concerns's avatarWIND CONCERNS ONTARIO: On WordPress

From Kawartha Lakes, Cavan-Monaghan Council not buying wind developer myths about coal power, citizens demonstrate against wind power generation projects.

Wind farm developer met with protest in Cavan Monaghan

Roughly 200 residents gathered outside the Township offices to protest against proposed five-turbine wind farm

Cavan Monaghan Wind Farm Protest

Sarah Frank/This Week

Roughly 200 people showed up at the Cavan Monaghan Township offices on Tuesday (Sept 3) to protest against a proposed wind farm in the area. It would straddle Cavan Monaghan Township and the City of Kawartha Lakes.

Peterborough This Week

MILLBROOK — Met by an angry crowd and a team of disapproving Cavan Monaghan Township councillors, the developer of a proposed wind farm was sent a clear message on Tuesday (Sept. 3).

In town to make a delegation to the Township regarding a five-turbine wind farm that would overlook the Devil’s Elbow skill hill area…

View original post 832 more words

From Germany: a “nightmare”

Ottawa Wind Concerns's avatarWIND CONCERNS ONTARIO: On WordPress

For those who think Europe is the haven for wind power generation done well, and where citizens are happy with the beautiful turbines spinning happily in the breeze, this will be a shock: people are sick, the landscape is ruined, and property values (and lives) devastated.

This short video comes from Russia Today via Facebook; thanks to Esther Wrightman and the Middlesex-Lambton group for calling attention to it.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=703983162949836

View original post

Hoen on property value loss (again): making statistics say what you want

Ottawa Wind Concerns's avatarWIND CONCERNS ONTARIO: On WordPress

In spite of the fact that properties near wind power projects remain unsold, or take a long time to sell, and sell at reduced prices, the Ontario government, MPAC, and of course the wind power lobby organization all insist there is no effect on property values. On the one hand, we have the Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA) including wind power plants as a negative to be disclosed on the Sellers Property Information Sheet, and we have Realtors telling us buyers don’t even want to SEE the turbines, let alone live next to them, and on the other we have these industry-supported opinions that say, everything is just fine.

 

Ben Hoen has released yet another study on property values (the last one was roundly trashed, in particular by Sunak and Madelener of Aachen University) which this time seems to answer criticisms that past studies did not look at property…

View original post 98 more words

Coming soon to YOUR electricity bill

Ottawa Wind Concerns's avatarWIND CONCERNS ONTARIO: On WordPress

The Ontario Energy Board (OEB) is responsible for setting Ontario’s time-of use (TOU) and regulated price plan (RPP) electricity rates, and it does this twice annually, in April and October.   The announcements are made slightly in advance of the effective dates of May 1st and November 1st and reflect what the OEB anticipates will occur in the upcoming six months.   The reset rates are based on what the OEB feels will be required to pay the generators over that period of time.

   The OEB preface their   announcement by saying that “the increase will add [insert amount] to the average ratepayer’s bill per month or [insert percentage] of the total monthly bill.”  They never specify that it is only the cost of electricity and that other items on your bill will/or may have already gone up!  Their last announcement on TOU and RPP rates indicated an increase of…

View original post 1,014 more words

Not a Willing Host reps meet in Ottawa, demand return of control

Ottawa Wind Concerns's avatarWIND CONCERNS ONTARIO: On WordPress

Not a Willing Host communities heard at AMO

Representatives of the now 64 communities in Ontario who have declared themselves Not a Willing Host to giant wind power developments, made their voices heard yesterday at the Association of Municipalities of Ontario convention, in Ottawa. Questions were raised during the afternoon “bearpit” session, during which Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli appeared to contradict himself, by saying that preserving valuable Ontario farmland and the quality of rural communities was a priority and then later saying that wind power was necessary for the province. He also said that there is no chance of giving municipalities a “veto” on wind power projects.
Enniskillen Mayor Kevin Marriott remarked later that he was appalled by the Minister’s “doublespeak.”
The municipal representatives held a meeting later in the day, and discussed what the effects of wind power had been on their communities to date, and what options were…

View original post 738 more words

Ontario’s Not a Willing Host communities meet today

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Coalition of ‘Unwilling Host’ Municipalities

Press Advisory August 20, 2013, Ottawa

Representatives of the 62 municipalities that have declared themselves ‘unwilling hosts’ to wind turbines are coming together during the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) meeting currently underway in Ottawa to discuss ways to bring their concerns more forcefully to the government.

According to Kevin Marriott, Mayor of Enniskillen, ‘the government has not addressed the concerns of these communities’.  In the Throne Speech and other statements by the Premier, they talked about wanting to locate projects in willing host communities, but there has been no substance to these announcements in terms of municipal input will be incorporated in the process.  Meanwhile, the government continues to approve wind turbine projects without consideration of municipal concerns according to Marriott.

Some municipal officials represented at AMO have already experienced the impact of wind turbines on their communities.  Complaints start once when they become operational with people being forced from their homes by noise and low frequency noise vibrations.  These municipalities are looking for the MOE to actually start enforcing the noise standards that they have set and to follow up on the health complaints being filed with Medical Officers of Health.

Mayor April Jeffs of Wainfleet wants the government to start applying learning from these early projects and apply increased set-backs from people’s homes to new projects before they are approved.  Wainfleet adopted a 2 kilometer set-back by-law that was challenged in court by the wind developer.

Municipalities are looking for the government to return real local planning authority for wind turbines to local municipalities.  These powers were taken away by the Green Energy Act. Municipalities are better placed that a Queen’s Park civil servants to identify local issues that need to be addressed in reviewing wind turbine projects.  They also have processes in place to review and approve other complex or controversial projects building projects that take place in their municipalities.

The municipal representatives at AMO will be meeting Tuesday August 20 at 4:30 pm. in the Governor-General 1 on the 4th floor of the Westin Hotel in Ottawa.

For further details contact, Kevin Marriott at 519-383-9170 or April Jeffs at 905-658-7890.

Ontario’s energy problem: too many “yes” ministers

Ottawa Wind Concerns's avatarWIND CONCERNS ONTARIO: On WordPress

Unlike the brilliant BBC satire, Yes Minister, in which a minister of the Crown makes decisions with the advice of staff, Ontario’s energy portfolio has been headed by ministers who are inclined to say “Yes” when confronted by environmental non-government organizations (ENGOs).
   On June 2, 2008, the Toronto Star published an article by Tyler Hamilton, former environmental columnist for the paper, that described the ideas formulated by the ENGO crowd, including quotes from David Suzuki, Kristopher Stevens, Executive Director of the Ontario Sustainable Energy Association, as well as Deborah Doncaster, who was and still is heading up the Community Power Fund (a fund granted millions of dollars by those “Yes Ministers” of the McGuinty government).
    Doncaster once made a presentation to the committee established to review the premise of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act (GEA) and said this:  “Finally, we believe…

View original post 783 more words