Tag Archives: Bob Chiarelli

Missing the point of Earth Hour in Ontario

18 Friday Mar 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

Earth Hour: cruel irony in Ontario where government policy is actually causing poverty and hardship
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.

©Parker Gallant,

March 17, 2016

NB: Note to Minister’s Chiarelli and Duguid: If you can afford a $100,000 Tesla automobile you can afford a charging station!

  1. LIM stands for “Low-Income Measure” per Statistics Canada.
  2. Big hat tip to Scott Luft for his great “daily reports” which go well beyond what IESO (Independent Electricity System Operator) provide.

Re-posted from Wind Concerns Ontario

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

Wind farms in Nation, North Dundas get contracts

14 Monday Mar 2016

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

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.”

Eastern Ontario wind farm contracts a betrayal of communities

11 Friday Mar 2016

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Ottawa Citizen, March 11, 2016

3-MW turbine south of Ottawa at Brinston: Ontario. Communities had no choice. [Photo by Ray Pilon, Ottawa]

3-MW turbine south of Ottawa at Brinston: Ontario. Communities had no choice. [Photo by Ray Pilon, Ottawa]

By David Reeveley

The Ontario government has betrayed rural municipalities by approving new wind farms in places that have explicitly voted against them, mayors say — including just east of Ottawa.

“Since we declared ourselves unwilling hosts, we thought we had it made,” says François St. Amour, mayor of The Nation Municipality. “Because there was some talk in the last provincial election that they would honour municipalities that declared themselves unwilling. But I guess that was just another electoral promise.”

The agency that makes the province’s deals for renewable power is readying a contract for a 32-megawatt wind farm there, one of a bunch of bids from private generating companies it’s just accepted. The other in Eastern Ontario is the biggest of the group, a 100-megawatt project in North Stormont.

Both Eastern Ontario councils took votes in 2015 to say they did not want the wind farms on their territories.

The province’s Green Energy Act, meant to kickstart an Ontario industry in manufacturing and maintaining renewable energy technology, gave virtually no say to local governments on where wind and solar farms might go. Many rural residents believed, and still do, they’re being sacrificed for the electricity needs of cities.

The government pulled back. Under the province’s new rules, municipalities don’t get veto power over renewable energy projects but they do formally get asked to say whether new wind or solar farms are welcome or not. Ottawa’s city council regularly votes its formal support for small solar projects, which is worth extra points when would-be operators submit their bids.

“It will be virtually impossible for a wind turbine, for example, or a wind project, to go into a community without some significant level of engagement,” energy minister and Ottawa MPP Bob Chiarelli told a legislature committee in 2013.

“Engagement.” Not “agreement.”

“We will not give a veto, and no jurisdiction gives a veto, to a municipality on any kind of public infrastructure. That should have been clear to them,” Chiarelli says. Wind farms in rural Ontario are like tall buildings downtown, he says: immediate neighbours may hate them but they’re still needed.

Thirteen of the 16 new contracts got local council approval. All of the ones that didn’t are wind farms — the two here and one in Dutton-Dunwich, between London and Windsor, where residents took the issue up in a referendum and voted 84 per cent against. Two wind farms are going to Chatham-Kent, whose council voted to support them.

“They’ve put municipalities on the sidelines. It seems, though, that municipalities get most of the grief,” St. Amour says. His council first voted in favour of the wind farm in The Nation without a whole lot of thought, he says, treating it like the solar farms councillors have welcomed in the past. Councillors changed their minds after hearing from residents.

“It was rough on council last summer. It was really, really rough. Especially because we can’t do much about it. We thought declaring unwilling hosts was it,” St. Amour says.

Mayor Dennis Fife of North Stormont says his council thought the same. “At one time, the government said that if you came out with something saying you were an unwilling host, that would be respected, but that wasn’t the case,” he says.

The wind farm in North Stormont, near Finch, will probably have between 30 and 50 windmills. “You’re going to see all of them. There’s the health aspect that people are worried about. Noise, blinking lights, all of that,” Fife says.

Read the full story here.

 

We live in the province of Toronto, says small-town mayor

11 Friday Mar 2016

Posted by in Ottawa, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

Community held a voters’ referendum–is getting a huge wind farm built by a U.S. company anyway

Dutton-Dunwich Mayor Cameron McWilliam says the view from Dutton’s main street, Currie Road, is that despite provincial promises of respect and an overwhelming no vote in a referendum, the Ontario government “totally ignored” local sentiment Thursday by awarding a Chicago-based company a contract to build dozens of industrial wind turbines in the Lake Erie community. (CRAIG GLOVER, The London Free Press)

Dutton-Dunwich Mayor Cameron McWilliam [Photo Craig Glover, London Free Press]

London Free Press, March 10, 2016

Dutton-Dunwich was the one Ontario municipality that held a referendum on wind farms.

Even though 84 per cent of residents opposed wind turbines, the Elgin County municipality that hugs Lake Erie learned Thursday it will end up with them anyway under a process the government promised would give local sentiments a priority.

“We were totally ignored,” Dutton-Dunwich Mayor Cameron McWilliam said. “We live in the province of Toronto, not the province of Ontario.”

A new round of wind farm development announced Thursday awards a contract to Chicago-based Invenergy to build dozens of industrial turbines in Dutton-Dunwich.

The municipality was the first in Ontario to hold a vote for residents on the issue and subsequently passed a resolution declaring itself an unwilling host for wind farm development. Another 89 Ontario municipalities also have passed the “not a willing host” resolution.

McWilliam said he was stunned Thursday when Dutton-Dunwich was on the list of new green energy projects.

The Ontario government had repeatedly assured McWilliam and other rural leaders that the wishes of local residents would be respected in a new era of public consultation.

In testimony before a legislature committee in November 2013, Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli said municipalities wouldn’t be given a veto over projects but it would be “very rare indeed” for any to be approved without municipal backing.

“It will be almost impossible for somebody to win one of those bidding processes without an engagement with the municipality,” Chiarelli said.

Representatives of Dutton-Dunwich had met with the Ontario government several times to make it clear the industrial wind turbines were unwanted, McWilliam said.

“They talked about local engagement and the need for local support. There wasn’t that support in Dutton-Dunwich. We’re disappointed,” he said.

McWilliam said the decision was particularly odd considering some other municipalities had rolled out the welcome mat for wind farm projects.

Malahide Township, which already has a wind farm, was one of them. Malahide Township Mayor Dave Mennill said he was shocked that a project proposed for Malahide was rejected while one was approved in Dutton-Dunwich.

It is a tough blow for both municipalities, he said.

“If you want to really tick people off, ask them for their input and then ignore it,” Mennill said. “I’m at a loss to explain it. Obviously, pricing trumps (community) support.” …

 

Read the full story here.

 

EDITOR’S NOTE: Two of the five wind power projects winning contracts are in the Ottawa area: Municipality of Nation, and North Stormont

Ontario municipalities unite to fight new wind power contracts

09 Wednesday Mar 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Ontario communities banding together to fight new wind power contracts

This is from the wind power industry’s own publication, North American Windpower

NAW Staff, March 8, 2016

Fifty-one Ontario municipalities are endorsing a resolution recently passed by the Township of Wainfleet Council that calls on the government of Ontario to stop awarding feed-in tariff (FIT) contracts for power generation from wind.

The resolution, passed in January, was based on December’s auditor general report that claimed Ontario has a surplus of power generation capacity and, under existing contracts, is paying double what other jurisdictions are paying for wind power, explains the Township of Wainfleet.

Thus, adding more surplus generation capacity would add to the already high costs of disposing of surplus electricity, says the township, which adds that the cost of electricity is a key concern for many Ontario residents.

The Ontario Chamber of Commerce has also reported the impact of high electricity costs on their members’ ability to grow their businesses and create jobs in Ontario. Thus, says Wainfleet, this suggests the need for a full, cost-benefit review of the renewable energy program before committing Ontario electricity users to even more surplus power.

According to Wind Concerns Ontario, the resolution also calls attention to the fact that wind power projects cause damage to the environment by killing wildlife.

April Jeffs, mayor of the Township of Wainfleet, is pleased with the support that her council’s resolution is receiving from across the province: “This quick response from other municipalities to the circulation of the resolution indicates that wind turbines are still front and center as an important issue in rural Ontario,” she says.

According to the township, Jeffs reports that at least one of the two projects in the area is the cause of citizen reports of deteriorating health. She is particularly concerned about the second project currently under development in her area – which involves 77 3.0-MW turbines in Wainfleet, West Lincoln and eastern Haldimand County.

The township says the more powerful turbines are located in areas with a sizeable residential population with an estimated 2,000 households living within 2 kilometers of the towers. The project will operate under one of the older, expensive FIT contracts criticized by the auditor general; the Wainfleet resolution asks the government to review options under the contract to cancel the project.

Now that coal-fired power plants have closed, says Wainfleet, the government should have met its carbon-reduction goals for the electrical power system in Ontario – which is now largely based on carbon-free hydroelectricity and nuclear power. This gives the province an opportunity to assess renewable generation alternatives that have less impact on the host communities, according to the township.

In addition, clauses in the 2015 RFP documents issued by the Independent Electricity System Operator do not commit the government to issue any wind contracts, so the government is protected against lawsuits from the bidders should it change course at this time, Wainfleet adds.

“Wind power is produced out of phase with demand in Ontario,” says Jane Wilson, president of Wind Concerns Ontario. “According to the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers, that can mean more greenhouse gas emissions, not less, because of the need for backup by natural gas power plants. Everyone wants to help the environment, but utility-scale wind power is not the answer.”

Brandy Giannetta, the Canadian Wind Energy Association’s (CanWEA) regional director for Ontario, calls the resolution a “political statement at the municipal level.”

Although it’s “unfortunate that it’s out there,” Giannetta tells NAW, she notes the importance of the province’s Large Renewable Procurement (LRP) process in showing the cost-competitiveness of wind power. The process calls for the procurement of utility-scale renewables projects; specifically, the LRP I requested up to 300 MW of wind.

The LRP, led by the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), aims to “strike a balance between early community engagement and achieving value for ratepayers,” according to the IESO. Giannetta says the LRP contracts will be awarded as soon as this week.

In March 2015, when the first request for proposals under the LRP was issued, Robert Hornung, president of CanWEA, said, “An important part of the RFP process will be early and meaningful community engagement. Effective community engagement is fundamental to the success of wind energy projects, and the wind industry values the right of individuals to have an important role in discussions about developments in their community.”

A full list of the municipalities supporting the resolution can be found here.

…

EDITOR’S NOTE: As of this writing the number of municipalities is now 61. See the list here.

Wasted hydro power adds millions to electricity bills

07 Monday Mar 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Wind gets first-to-the-grid (which we pay for) meaning spilled or wasted hydro (which we also pay for). [Photo: OPG]

Wind gets first-to-the-grid (which we pay for) meaning spilled or wasted hydro (which we also pay for). [Photo: OPG]

OPG spills hydro and $150 million goes “down the drain” 

OPG released their 2015 annual report  Friday March 4, 2016; it confirms that 3.2 terawatts (TWh) of water that could have been used for power was spilled last year. (This is similar to the spilled amount in 2014 year.)

How much is 3.2 TWh? Enough to supply about 350,000 average Ontario households with electricity for a full year … but it didn’t!

Here is what OPG’s annual report had to say:

“Baseload generation supply surplus to Ontario demand continued to be prevalent in 2015. The surplus to the Ontario market is managed by the IESO, mainly through generation reductions at hydroelectric and nuclear stations and grid connected renewable resources. Reducing hydroelectric production, which often results in spilling of water, is the first measure that the IESO uses to manage surplus baseload generation (SBG) conditions. During each of 2015 and 2014, OPG lost 3.2 TWh of hydroelectric generation due to SBG conditions.” 

The principal reason we have surplus baseload is due to wind and solar being granted “first to the grid” rights. And, because wind and solar are intermittent (and unreliable) OPG is forced to spill clean renewable hydro power.

While spilling hydro in itself is disturbing in Ontario, especially considering our hydro-electric history, the fact we are now obliged to pay for the spilled hydro at the same time we are paying wind developers 13.5 cents a kilowatt hour (kWh) and solar generators as much as 80 cents a kWh simply adds more costs to our monthly hydro bills.

OPG received $47 million per TWh (4.7 cents/kWh) for the spilled hydro. That means electricity ratepayers’ pockets were picked for over $150 million, or about $31.00 per ratepayer.   Our reward for absorbing that cost was zero.

This month, Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli, will likely announce that Ontario will add even more intermittent, unreliable wind and solar generation. Your pockets are not safe yet.

© Parker Gallant

March 7, 2016

Reposted from Wind Concerns Ontario. See the post at Wind Concerns Ontario here.

Ontario electricity bills up 97%; more wind power contracts to come

09 Tuesday Feb 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Ontario gives away $4.5B in ratepayer dollars; Energy Minister Chiarelli persists in directive to add more intermittent, expensive wind power

Electricity costs up 97 percent in Ontario: power surplus exports rising

wind contract banner

February 8, 2016. Reposted from Wind Concerns Ontario

The GA or Global Adjustment first made its appearance on IESO’s Monthly Market Report in January 2007. As noted in the chart below, that year, the GA finished 2007 at $3.95 per megawatt hour (MWh) which means it cost Ontario’s electricity ratepayers about $600 million for the full year. In, 2015 the GA was just shy of $10 billion.

To be fair, the GA includes the price of “contracted” power, less the value given to it on the hourly Ontario electricity price (HOEP) market. As a result of Ontario’s high surplus of generating capacity and the intermittent presentation of wind and solar in periods of low demand, has resulted in the HOEP showing declining values. Despite declining values the cost of a kilowatt hour (kWh) of electricity increased from an average of 5.43 cents/kWh to 10.7 cents/kWh from November 1, 2007 to November 1, 2015 — up 97%. The upsetting part, and a driving force behind the 97% increase is surplus generation sold to our neighbours. We sell excess output to New York and Michigan, etc. without inclusion of the GA. The GA lost on those sales is charged to Ontario ratepayers and has become increasingly large. The chart indicates the “intertie flows” (exports/imports netted) initially cost Ontario ratepayers $20 million for 2007, but that has increased, and representing more $1.3 billion for 2015.

It is anticipated the annual cost of subsidizing surplus exports will continue to climb.

Scott Luft notes results for January 2016 are 20% higher than January 2015 for the cost of electricity as the HOEP was lower despite what Ontario’s Liberal government says about pricing stabilizing. With plans to add 500 MW of capacity for wind and solar, the climb will continue for at least another two years. Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli recently stated: “Our government’s focus is now on preparations for the next long term energy plan and the ways in which we can continue to drive down costs for Ontarians”. (Note to the Minister: a 97% increase does not “drive down costs”!)

Further reference to the chart points out addition of more wind and solar over the past nine years has driven up the percentage of renewables exported. The “Net Intertie” (net exports) increased from 19.6% in 2007 to over 57% in 2015.

What the Energy Minister needs to accept is this: we don’t need more intermittent and unreliable power.

That message is not getting through, despite evidence presented by the Auditor General of Ontario on several occasions and by numerous critics in the media.

Costing ratepayers $4.5 billion in after-tax dollars to help our neighbours is what’s happened. Perhaps Minister Chiarelli could suggest to Finance Minister Charles Sousa, that the money extracted from ratepayers provides no benefits to Ontarians. Perhaps a tax receipt is in order — that would help cash-strapped citizens, but there is a better idea.

The Energy Minister needs to immediately recall his directive to the IESO to acquire another 500 MW of contracts for intermittent wind and solar power.

© Parker Gallant,
February 7, 2016

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

Year Net Intertie 1. Global Adjustment Cost to Ratepayers % of Renewables to Wind Solar &
TWh 2. Million of $/TWh GA X Net Intertie Net Intertie Biomass generation
(millions)
2015 16.86 TWh $77.80 $1,311 57.20%        9.65TWh
2014 15.15 TWh $54.59 $846 47.00%        7.12TWh
2013 13.40 TWh $59.22 $794 48.50%        6.50TWh
2012 9.90 TWh $49.23 $487 59.60%        5.90TWh
2011 9.00 TWh $40.48 $364 56.70%        5.10TWh
2010 8.80 TWh $27.18 $239 46.60%        4.10TWh
2009 11.30 TWh $30.56 $345 31.00%        3.50TWh
2008 10.90 TWh $6.12 $67 22.00%        2.40TWh
2007 5.10 TWh $3.95 $20 19.60%        1.00TWh
       Totals 100.40 TWh $4,473     37.00TWh

Ontario quashes citizen participation in electricity issues

04 Monday Jan 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Government halts assistance for citizens, community groups to present views on rate increases and more

Chiarelli's Bill 112: citizens lose the ability to hold utility monopolies to account [Photo Richard Brennan Toronto Star]

Chiarelli’s Bill 112: citizens lose the ability to hold utility monopolies to account [Photo Richard Brennan Toronto Star]

Toronto Star, January 4, 2016

By: Brady Yauch Published on Mon Jan 04 2016

Ontario’s desire for total control over all aspects of the electricity sector is nearly fulfilled.

The push to eliminate dissent and independent review of the province’s energy monopolies has been a decade in the making. Since 2004, many of the province’s largest and most expensive policies were implemented with little to no oversight — at great cost to ratepayers, as the Auditor General forcefully highlighted in her recent annual report.

But Queen’s Park is set to fully take over all decision-making regarding the province’s energy monopolies by solidifying its control over the province’s energy regulator, the Ontario Energy Board (OEB), with the recent passing of Bill 112. In doing so, Ontario is shutting down the last arena of independent public review of the billions of dollars being spent by the province and its many publicly owned utilities.

The legislation, “Strengthening Consumer Protection and Electricity System Oversight Act,” would deny independent intervenors the funds needed to hire the lawyers and experts needed at these hearings, effectively blocking their participation.

Prior to this legislation, any individual ratepayer or organization representing ratepayers — ranging from big, industrial groups to cottage associations or low-income organizations — could apply for funding and act as an intervenor in any rate application. The government would instead replace the independent intervenors with a new government-appointed consumer representative.

In other jurisdictions where this has occurred, the direct cost of this new bureaucracy has been far more expensive than the cost of reimbursing intervenors for their lawyers and consultants. The indirect costs of losing the ability to hold the utility monopolies to account by forcing them to justify their proposed rate increases before the OEB could be much greater still.

One study found that intervenors have been highly successful at paring back the monopolies’ rate requests, their lawyers and consultants costing ratepayers just 2 cents annually while helping to reduce rate increases by $28 per customer. Other studies found that intervenors account for 1 per cent or less of overall regulatory costs, which themselves are a small amount of total electricity costs borne by ratepayers.

Replacing these groups with a government-appointed consumer representative charged with questioning government-owned monopolies eliminates the last remaining voice of independent review of proposals by public monopolies to spend billions of dollars on capital projects.

The province’s new legislation also ensures that any new transmission line can be deemed a “priority project” by the ministry of energy and automatically approved by the OEB. In the past, the OEB would analyze such projects to determine whether they were necessary or cost-effective. Furthermore, the province is considering more legislation that will exempt all government-directed energy plans or projects to be exempt from the Environmental Assessment Act.

The province’s previous moves to sidestep independent review have been costly for ratepayers. The smart meter rollout — which cost ratepayers $2 billion and counting and still isn’t fully functional — was done without any review from the OEB or other regulators. Billions of dollars in contracts have been — and continue to be — given to renewable energy and natural gas generators without any review by the OEB or intervenors. And the long-term energy plans developed by the province’s own energy planning experts — the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) — were never implemented and, instead, were replaced with plans written by the ministry of energy that were, again, never fully reviewed at the OEB and were later criticized by the Auditor General as overly expensive.

More recently, the province collapsed the OPA into another energy agency, the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), which is in charge of operating the province’s wholesale electricity market, ensuring that even more political control is embedded in ever more parts of the electricity sector. There is no longer anything “independent” about the Independent Electricity System Operator.

In the end, the OEB and the intervenors were the last voice of criticism that wasn’t on the payroll of the province. By replacing them with a government-led consumer advocate, the province will control every step of decision-making on electricity policy and spending, those pesky checks and balances eliminated at last.

Brady Yauch is an economist and Executive Director of the Consumer Policy Institute (CPI). He has acted as an intervenor at the OEB.

Wind power no-show means more CO-2 emissions for Ontario

31 Friday Jul 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ontario's gas plants ran at near full tilt during heat wave; wind was a no-show
Ontario’s gas plants ran at near full tilt during heat wave; wind was a no-show

 Wind Concerns Ontario, July 30, 2015

Wind power slump causes CO2 spike

by Parker Gallant

The Independent Electricity System Operator’s (IESO) summary report for July 28, 2015 demonstrated how it was an atypical day for Ontario’s industrial wind generators.   The Toronto temperature reached 33 degrees Celsius meaning Ontario’s electricity demand was high.  Demand averaged 19,515 MWs per hour and peaked at 22,471 MWh.

Wind generators were playing in the sandbox for the whole 24 hours, producing a miserly 2,180 MWh which equaled 2.9% of their (IESO posted) capacity and less than a half percent (½ %) of total Ontario demand of 462,144 MWh.  For two of those hours (9 and 10) wind produced less than 10 MWh — that probably meant they were drawing more power than they produced.

Picking up the slack for wind generators fell to Ontario’s 9,200 MW capacity of the gas plants.  For several hours those gas plants were running close to their maximums, and in the 24 hours produced 94,386 MWh. That’s slightly more than 20% of Ontario’s total demand.

What this all means is that, on most high-demand, hot summer days, wind can’t be counted on to reduce emissions as wind power advocates claim it does.  Those 94,386 MWh of gas generated electricity cranked up Ontario’s CO2  emissions on July 28, 2015 by approximately 47,000 tons, thanks to wind’s absence!

Simply put, this confirms the inability of wind to generate electricity when it is needed.

The time has arrived for the Energy Minister, Bob Chiarelli, to recognize the facts and cancel any further additions to Ontario’s wind turbine fleet.   Electricity generated from industrial wind turbines should be recognized as 130-year old technology that simply can’t be counted on when needed.

Pull the plug!

©Parker Gallant,

July 30, 2015

Bob Chiarelli cost you $135–and it’s going to get worse

27 Wednesday May 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

April 2015: surplus wind power costs Ontario millions

Energy Minister hiding his head over consumer losses due to surplus power, lots of it windEnergy 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.

Time to stop digging the hole.

© Parker Gallant

May 27, 2015

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.