Tag Archives: Feed In Tariff Ontario

Energy Minister Chiarelli fails to answer FIT contract question

20 Thursday Mar 2014

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

MPP Laurie Scott asked Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli today whether there was still a FIT contract in place for the now withdrawn Sumac Ridge wind power project in Kawartha Lakes. After making a lame joke about shoe stores, Minister Chiarelli said his government will not cancel contracts and to do so would result in $20 billion worth of litigation for Ontario. (That is the amount of contracts for the 55 wind power projects still in the approval process.)

This is false. The FIT contract is the first step in a long process leading to Renewable Energy Approval; the government has the ability to choose not to fulfill the contracts, and not to grant a renewable energy approval at any stage, or to rescind such approval once granted.

In a rare appearance on this issue, Environment Minister Jim Bradley also stands to not answer the question, replying with platitudes about how rigorous the approval process is, and how the public can appeal any project. Right.

Here is the clip from Queen’s Park today. Note the mention of Wind Concerns Ontario’s letter to Minister Chiarelli.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rDjrTGRVoQ&feature=youtu.be

Advertisement

European countries revising wind power contracts

20 Thursday Mar 2014

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Europe tearing up renewable energy contracts (you can too, Bob)

Europe’s renewable energy investors are facing a harsh reality – that the promises from politicians can be taken away at any moment. Canada’s renewable energy investors may soon face that same reality.
Idyllic isn’t it? Also not the truth.

Governments rip up renewable contracts

Brady Yauch, Special to Financial Post | March 18, 2014 | Last Updated: Mar 19 7:13 AM ET
More from Special to Financial Post

Companies ‘do not have a right [to expect the compensation] not to be changed’
Governments across Europe, regretting the over-generous deals doled out to the renewable energy sector, have begun reneging on them. To slow ruinous power bills hikes, governments are unilaterally rewriting contracts and clawing back unseemly profits.
In Italy, one of Europe’s largest economies and one that lavished billions in subsidies on the renewable sector, the government in 2013 applied its so-called “Robin Hood tax” to renewable energy producers. Under the new rule, renewable energy producers with more than €3 million in revenue and income greater than €300,000 must now pay a tax of 10.5%.
That follows a 2012 move to charge all solar producers a five cent tax per kilowatt hour on all self-consumed energy. The government also told solar producers that it would stop taking their power – and would offer no compensation – when their output overwhelms the system.
The result of these and other changes, says the solar industry, has been a surge in bankruptcies and a massive decrease in solar investment.
In Belgium – where both regional and federal bodies hand out renewable subsidies – a number of retroactive changes have capped the largesse renewable producers once received. In one region the price for “green certificates” – which producers received for renewable energy – was slashed by 79%. The government original committed to buy green certificates at a benchmarked price for 20 years, then cut it to 10 years.
Belgium’s regulators tried to impose a fee on all energy added to the grid from small- to medium-sized solar producers. While the country’s court of appeals struck down that fee, a defiant regional government plans to reintroduce it next year, forcing all solar producers to pay an annual fee that varies with the power they pump into the grid. Various municipalities, meanwhile, are introducing taxes on new and existing wind turbines.
As in Italy, Belgium’s renewable sector in the county has gone dark –“imploded” in the view of a solar industry publication. Many companies shrank or went bankrupt.
In France the government last year cut by 20% the “guaranteed” rate offered to all solar producers, and retroactively applied it to projects connected to the grid in the previous three months. The government is also considering ending an 11% tax break on solar energy producers.
Perhaps the most dramatic moves occurred in Spain, for years the poster child for those touting a transition to green energy. Since 2000, Spain has given renewable producers $41-billion more for their power than it has fetched on the open market. To recover those subsidies, the Spanish government recently killed its Feed In Tariff (FIT) program for renewables,….

Read the full story here.

Wind power approvals pushing electricity bills higher

13 Thursday Feb 2014

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Wind Power Project Approvals Driving Up Cost of Ontario’s Electricity

By Parker Gallant

The provincial government would have us believe it is taking steps to manage rapidly rising electricity costs. Meanwhile, in the background, they are pushing 55 wind turbine projects through the Renewable Energy Approval process, projects  that will add $1.1 billion per year to Ontario’s electricity costs.  The impact of these turbine projects is 20 times the cost of the gas plant relocations. 

The 230-megawatt  (MW) Niagara Region Wind Project proposed for West Lincoln and Wainfleet in the Niagara Region alone will add $78 million annually to Ontario’s electricity costs when approved.  The cost over its 20-year contract is $1.6 Billion.  Rather than declining or delaying these 55 projects, the provincial government continues to issue approvals and increasing electricity costs to levels that Ontario household and business users cannot afford. 

In fact, wind power projects continue to be approved almost weekly despite Ontario’s current surplus of electricity.  Some operators of existing wind power generation facilities are actually being paid not to produce electricity, and neighbouring jurisdictions like New York and Michigan are being paid to take Ontario’s surplus power, which they in turn use to attract jobs away from Ontario with cheap electricity.  To create capacity on the grid for the expensive power generated by wind turbines, Ontario is also idling the Niagara hydro plants which in the past have powered Ontario’s economy by supplying cheap clean electricity.

The truth is that wind is not a reliable source of electric power.  In Ontario, wind turbines generate most of their electricity at night, and in the fall and winter months—exactly when we don’t need it. To provide the electricity needed by the province during the day, and in the hot summers, Ontario has had to supplement wind turbines with gas plants to provide electricity when the wind is not blowing.  This means that the average Ontario electricity user will not only pay about $220 annually for the cost of the wind turbine contracts but also another $200 annually to pay for the base costs of the gas plants needed to back them up.  Ontario electricity ratepayers could do a lot with that $420.

While the government argues that it has no option but to proceed with these projects, Ontario court have confirmed that the Feed-in-Tariff contracts issued for these projects only allow the proponent to enter a “complex regulatory process that might have led to approvals” and that the Environmental Project Act gives the Ministry of the Environment Director “broad powers to issue, reject, or amend Renewable Energy Approvals.”  The known impacts of existing wind power projects on communities in rural Ontario give the Ministry of the Environment Director a basis for rejecting or delaying these projects.  The Ontario government is pursuing wind power without a proper cost-benefit analysis, as was pointed out by the Auditor-General in 2011; no analysis was done before launching into the wind power program, or since. Citing benefits to the environment, is not an appropriate rationale:  with the coal plants closed, there is no need for concern about pollution from them, and there are also valid concerns about environmental damage and harm to wildlife from wind power plants.

For example, the government’s own Environmental Review Tribunal revoked approval to construct the Ostrander Point project last July because the project would cause “serious and irreversible harm” to the endangered Blanding’s turtles native to the area.  Rather than accepting that decision, however, the Ministry of the Environment partnered with the wind industry in January to appeal this ruling in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Toronto; the Ministry is trying to overturn the decision to protect the turtles.  Similarly, the Ministry continues to support the Wainfleet Wind Energy project, despite the obvious dangers presented to users of the nearby Skydive Burnaby facility.

Electricity costs in Ontario are now among the highest in North America. Ontario households and businesses have reached the limit of their capacity to pay for this Green Energy experiment. It is time for the Ontario government to stop approving more wind turbine projects, like the Niagara Region Wind Project, that will drive up the cost of electricity in the province for the next 20 years while generating electricity we do not need. 

Parker Gallant is a former vice-president with the TD Bank, a former director with Energy Probe, and currently an energy analyst and commentator. He is vice-president of Wind Concerns Ontario.

Parker Gallant: are Ontario’s electricity bills a regressive tax?

07 Monday Oct 2013

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

On September 10, 2013, when the temperature hit 34 degrees in Toronto, demand for electricity in Ontario peaked at 8 PM when we were consuming 22,417 megawatts (MW) of power.  At that point according to the Adequacy Report from the IESO, we still had excess capacity−8,437 MW in fact, or enough to power over seven million average Ontario homes.

So the question becomes, if we have power to spare, why do we continue to add expensive sources of power generation like wind and solar to the electricity grid?   Surely the addition of that expensive generation that must be backed up will do nothing more than drive electricity prices up.
Has our electricity system turned into nothing more than a form of wealth transfer or, perhaps, a regressive tax?   The latter is defined as: “A tax that takes a larger percentage from low-income people than from high-income people. A regressive tax is generally a tax that is applied uniformly. This means that it hits lower-income individuals harder.”
As it turns out, the management of our electricity system by the Liberal government during the past 10 years has been both.   Consider the following points and see if any of them were meant to keep our electricity prices competitive with other markets, and that might have helped to create jobs in Ontario. Job creation may have resulted in tax revenue that could have been use to reduce our deficit, improve health care, built better transit, or provide better government services.
Reality in Ontario today
Here is what ratepayers must accept:
§     Paying for smart meters and resulting time-of-use pricing–we eat supper after 7 PM and do our laundry in the middle of the night
§     Paying to replace smart meters because they “don’t communicate”
§     Paying for the development of the “smart grid” which turns out to be not so smart.
§     Subsidizing very large energy consumers by picking up a chunk ($200/400 million) of what they would have to pay if they were a household, just to keep remaining manufacturing jobs
§     Paying huge Net Revenue payments to gas plant electricity generators for sitting idle
§     Paying wind generators to not produce electricity
§     Paying solar generators to not produce electricity
§     Paying to erect meteorological stations to measure how much wind generators might have produced so that we can pay them for not producing
§     Paying for “steaming off” perfectly clean nuclear power from Bruce Power
§     Paying for the Ontario Power Authority to run ads on TV, radio and the newspapers to tell us to conserve electricity, racking up average annual spending of $300 million
§     Paying for costs of operating the Ontario Power Authority, which we were told was a temporary long-term planning agency
§     Paying to get the local distribution company to pick up old refrigerators and being told it’s free
§     Paying to move two gas generation plants at a cost of about $1 billion
§     Paying to have the school boards in Toronto and elsewhere put solar panels on their roofs so they could generate money to fix some of the roofs
§     Paying for grants to people that can afford to purchase new expensive electric vehicles (EVs)
§     Paying to put in charging stations for those EVs that use the streets but don’t pay gas taxes
§     Paying for someone else to use coupons to purchase CFL or LED light bulbs
§     Paying for grants to small and medium sized companies to retrofit their lighting systems
§     Paying for expensive electricity generated by solar panels placed on your local municipally owned arena
§     Paying for grants so your municipality can exchange incandescent and halogen street lights to LED lights
§     Paying your local distribution company extra money each year because their revenue deteriorated because you conserved electricity, so they asked for and got a rate increase blessed by the Ontario Energy Board
§     Paying to connect wind and solar generators to the transmission system run by Hydro One, a wholly owned provincial monopoly
§     Paying the cost of electricity produced by your neighbour for those solar panels on his roof for which he gets 80 cents a kilowatt hour
§     Paying for the costs of solar power produced by corporations like Loblaws, Canadian Tire,  IKEA, etc., which they sell into the electricity grid at 70 cents a kilowatt hour, but buy the power they need at the same (or lower) price that you pay
§     Paying forever for “residual stranded debt” that should have been paid off 5 years ago.
§     Paying for the sale of surplus electricity to New York, Michigan, etc. at a price 75/85% below its cost
§     Paying HST on our electricity bills which automatically added 7% to its cost and generates well in excess of $1 billion for the province’s coffers
Now look over these 28 points and think about which represent “wealth transfers” and which represent a “regressive tax.”   Review them again and pick out any that added cost-effective new generation.  Hint: you will probably have trouble finding the latter!
Ontario’s legacy
Energy Minister Chiarelli recently bragged about the reputed $35 billion in new investment attracted to the province by the Green Energy and Green Economy Act and the 31,000 jobs that it supposedly created. Those 31,000 jobs (most are relatively short term construction jobs) will cost the ratepayers of the province over $3 million each.
What Minister Chiarelli didn’t say was that the $35-billion investment will cost ratepayers well over $100/120 billion by the time those 20-year contracts have ended, and most of that will be extracted from the pockets of many Ontarians who cannot afford the “regressive tax” it has become. Many are discovering they can’t afford to turn their lights on for fear of being unable to buy groceries.
What a legacy for the McGuinty/Wynne team.
Parker Gallant,
October 3, 2013
The opinions expressed here are those of the author and not necessarily Wind Concerns Ontario.

Ontario’s Not a Willing Host communities meet today

20 Tuesday Aug 2013

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

≈ 2 Comments

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.

Ottawa economist on 10 years of power mismanagement in Ontario

23 Tuesday Jul 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

You’ve read Bob Lyman, an economist specializing in energy issues, on these pages before.

In his latest work, he has written an overview of the last 10 years of energy policy as it relates to electricity in Ontario, and come up with the very worrying conclusion: the whole thing has been grossly mismanaged.

The question now is, can Ontario ever get out of this hole? That’s tough when Ontario keeps approving big, expensive wind power projects on the order of one a week this summer, despite not having a current long-term energy plan.

Here is Bob Lyman’s latest:

Ten Years of Liberal Mismanagement of Ontario’s Electricity System

A Layperson’s Summary

On July 16, 2013, Parker Gallant, a retired banker who for about six years has written about Ontario electricity policies, wrote an article to mark the forthcoming tenth anniversary of the Liberal Party’s tenure as government of Ontario. Mr. Gallant’s article can be found at the following link:

http://www.freewco.blogspot.ca/2013/07/ontario-liberals-10-years-of.html

This article is of great importance for Ontario residents who want to understand what has been happening to electricity supply, demand and prices over the past decade and, perhaps more importantly, how they should weigh these developments as they contemplate forthcoming elections in the province. Shortly, there will be five by-elections in different parts of Ontario that may swing the balance of power in the legislature. It is also likely that there will be a general election in Ontario within the next two years.

Voters need to understand what the fuss is all about and how it affects them. Unfortunately, Mr. Gallant’s article, as wonderfully insightful as it is, might be difficult to understand for the average citizen who does not follow electricity matters on a regular basis. The objective of this note is to offer a somewhat simplified version of the story people should know. …

Read the whole document here: Ten Years of Liberal Mismanagement of Ontario’s Electricity System

Upcoming topics: what does the situation at Chatham-Kent airport (where 8 turbines have been order removed) really mean?

Please contact us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Donations welcome at PO Box 3, North Gower ON   K0A 2T0

Wind power project siting process needs to be replaced, says Ottawa Wind Concerns

18 Thursday Jul 2013

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

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

Posted by the Ottawa Citizen:

Wind-power projects as harmful as cancelled gas plants, critic contends

By Elizabeth Payne, OTTAWA CITIZEN July 18, 2013 6:04 PM
 OTTAWA —The same process that led to Ontario’s “gas plant fiasco” is being used for wind-generation projects with disastrous results, says the head of a group concerned about a proposed wind farm in rural southern Ottawa.

“The gas plants got all the attention, but the wind-power projects are more widespread — and causing real problems for communities in terms of health problems, social disruption, lost property value and harm to the natural environment,” wrote Jane Wilson in a submission to the Ontario Power Generation and the Independent Energy System Operator as part of a “dialogue” about the way the province locates large power projects.

The consultation process stemmed from the political controversy around the location, and cancellation, of planned gas plants in southern Ontario. The Liberal government’s handling of the costly gas plant issue is the subject of an inquiry and a criminal investigation.

Ottawa Wind Concerns, which Wilson heads (in addition to Wind Concerns Ontario) wants a new system for planning and siting all large energy projects, including wind, that gives local communities more control. The Liberal government’s Green Energy Act gave the province control over location of wind energy projects. In May, the provincial government announced changes that will make developers work more closely with municipalities.

Ottawa Wind Concerns says, however, that the province needs to go further and give municipalities full control over projects as well as treating them the same way an industrial project would be treated. So far 60 municipalities across the province have declared themselves not willing hosts to wind power projects.

“Local land use planning needs to be returned to communities as a start and power projects should be treated as any other sort of infrastructure, with residents having full input to decisions that will affect their community, their financial futures and their health.”

Although many people living near wind turbines complain about health effects, research into the issue is limited. Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health, in a 2010 report, concluded that “the scientific evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” It also concluded that sound from wind turbines with common setbacks is not sufficient to cause hearing problems, although people might find it annoying. It also said there is no scientific evidence that vibrations from low-frequency wind turbine noise causes health issues. The report also said that “community engagement at the outset of planning for wind turbines is important and may alleviate health concerns.”

Health Canada has launched a major study into the effect of wind turbines on health. Meanwhile, federal cabinet minister Pierre Poilievre and Conservative MPP Lisa MacLeod, both of whom represent the riding where the project is planned, are calling for a moratorium on the North Gower project until the Health Canada study is completed.

A spokesman for the company that is proposing to build the project, Prowind Canada Inc., said it is temporarily on hold until the province determines what the new process for awarding wind power contracts will look like.

Rochelle Rumney, environmental co-ordinator with the company, said — environmental coordinator said Prowind would “like to work with the community and try to have everybody be comfortable with the project.”

Meanwhile, during an ongoing July heat wave that has strained the power grid, wind power contributed less than one per cent to Ontario’s power needs this week, something that Wilson says underlines the need for a cost-benefit analysis of wind-power projects.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
OWC notes: despite community opposition, and opposition from elected representatives, despite clear evidence this project will cost taxpayers/ratepayers $4.8 million a year for power we don’t need, it looks like Prowind is still prepared to proceed with the North Gower-Richmond project…or sell it to someone who is. That means, we need even more help and especially funds for legal counsel. Donations welcome at PO Box 3, North Gower ON   K0A 2T0 Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Green Energy Act “bigger debacle” than gas plant scandal

27 Thursday Jun 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Here from today’s Financial Post, a comment from Parker Gallant, on the cost of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act. He estimates $1,100 per household per year, but that’s not including property value loss for areas living near wind power projects…Ontario is in deep, deep trouble, and it’s not over yet.

The Ontario Power Authority is currently tripping through Ontario asking communities what will make them happier about the planning process for large-scale power projects.

Here is Parker Gallant: http://www.freewco.blogspot.ca/2013/06/parker-gallant-ontario-green-energy-act.html

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com (join our confidential email list for updates) and please donate toward our legal and other costs PO Box 3 North Gower ON  K0A 2T0

Ontario Government’s green power policy: an “abject failure”

25 Tuesday Jun 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Here today from the Waterloo Region Record, a comment on the McGuinty government’s “green energy” program which was meant to bring jobs and prosperity to Ontario, while cleaning up our air (never mind that the air pollution in Southern Ontario is from cars and trucks).

The author rightly points out that the government continues to put a brave face on its policy, even as it disintegrates daily. What the author of this comment doesn’t know, is that the Ontario government continues to approve giant wind power projects weekly. In fact, this month has seen a record number of project approvals, including one at West Lincoln, which had passed a resolution at Council declaring itself not to be a “willing host” to wind power on this scale.

Here is the comment. Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com and donations are most welcome for legal and other costs at PO Box 3, North Gower ON  K0A 2T0

http://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/3854511-a-white-flag-for-green-energy/

A white flag for green energy

Waterloo Region Record

The Ontario Liberals are striving mightily to portray their disastrous green energy program as a rousing success. Do not believe them. It is an abject failure that inflated electricity costs, alienated rural communities and never lived up to its billing as the engine not just of more jobs but an entirely new manufacturing sector.

This is the context in which to understand last week’s announcement that the province had downsized a multi-billion dollar deal it signed with Samsung Group in 2010 to produce electricity from wind and solar projects.

Instead of giving the South Korean corporate giant $9.7 billion for 2,500 megawatts of electricity, Ontario will spend $6 billion for 1,369 megawatts. We pay less. We also get less. Samsung is cutting its investment in new green energy plants and components in Ontario from the $7 billion it originally pledged to $5 billion.

Although the government once boasted that Samsung would create 16,000 new manufacturing jobs, the number of new workers being talked about last week was just 900. That’s a flimsy foundation for an economic renaissance.

Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli defended the latest Samsung agreement as a way “to bend the cost curve (down) for ratepayers.” But even he can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. The best that can be said of his accomplishment is that the government’s ill-conceived and poorly delivered green energy crusade will leave ratepayers battered but not comatose.

Go back a few years and remember then-premier Dalton McGuinty’s grand and hubristic vision of turning this province into a green utopia. Making everyone pay far more for wind and solar energy than other sources of electricity was the key to his plan. Sure it would hurt consumers — but it would be worth it.

Not only would the McGuinty brain trust produce more energy for Ontario, it would do so in an environmentally friendly way. To top it all off, in the wake of the devastating recession of 2008-09 in which thousands of the province’s factory jobs were lost, the Liberals were going to create a thriving green energy industry that would sell to a global market.

It turns out McGuinty was a modern-day Don Quixote tilting at wind turbines. He was off on just about every premise. The World Trade Organization recently struck down the made-in-Ontario provision in McGuinty’s program.

The Liberals overestimated Ontario’s energy needs. The recession drove down demand for electricity and the province wound up with a surplus of it. We don’t need all the electricity Samsung was originally contracted to deliver.

The job boom never materialized either. As it happens, China can make solar panels far cheaper than Ontario. No wonder one of Canada’s most touted solar power firms, Arise Technology Corporation of Cambridge, went bankrupt last year while solar energy equipment maker Silken SA closed its Windsor operation.

And the bloated cost of this energy scheme will hurt for years to come. In 2011, Auditor General Jim McCarter estimated Ontario’s green energy policies were adding $220 million a year to the province’s already soaring hydro bills which were now among the most expensive in North America. No wonder the government scaled back its rates for green energy.

With McGuinty now gone and Kathleen Wynne in the premier’s office, the government is running away from the green energy program as fast as it can. The Samsung agreement has been overhauled. In future, priority will be given to wind turbine projects where there is community support.

For months, Ontarians have been justifiably outraged by the same government’s cavalier cancellation of two gas-fired electricity plants, arguably for political reasons and at a cost to the public of at least $585 million. The green energy program is as big a fiasco — and will cost more in the long-run.

 

Better ways to spend $40 billion in Ontario

20 Thursday Jun 2013

Posted by in Health, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

See the news release from the County Coalition for Safe Affordable Green Energy, in which the group suggests that maybe, just maybe, there might be better things to do with the $40 billion Ontario will hand over in subsidy to giant corporate wind power developers (who have suddenly developed a taste for litigation against communities resisting the invasive power plants).

Transit improvements really would solve the problem of air pollution in Toronto and southern Ontario.

For immediate release   

Ontario’s $40-billion wind power subsidy: spend it  on transit and hospitals

PICTON, ONTARIO, JUNE 20TH, 2013–  On June 17th the County Coalition for Safe and Appropriate Green Energy (CCSAGE) wrote to all Ontario MPPs advising that the McGuinty/Smitherman wind power fantasy will cost citizens $40 billion in increased electricity and tax bills over 20 years.  CCSAGE believes this money is better spent on transit and hospitals.

$40 billion is 145 times the mere $275 million recently reported by the Auditor-General as the cost for relocating the Mississauga gas plant.  Garth Manning, Chair of CCSAGE, noted that: “Our electricity bills are increasing dramatically.  That $40 billion could be much better spent,” he said.  “Let’s put a hold on wind power generation—an inefficient and unreliable technology—and reallocate those huge wind power subsidies to areas of much greater need.”

Manning urged MPPs to consider how half of that amount could upgrade an eco-friendly Metrolinx transit system for the GTHA.  “MPPs should also know how the other half could save threatened community hospitals,” he said.

“People in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area (GTHA) are living with gridlock, creating an urban air pollution cloud over all,” said Jane Wilson, RN, President of Wind Concerns Ontario. “At the same time, residents of rural communities are being forced to live with massive industrial scale wind power projects that result in sleep disturbance, property devaluation, wildlife killings, destroyed landscapes, tourism losses, lost quality of life, and divided communities,” she said.

CCSAGE recognizes that half of Ontario citizens live in the GTHA where gridlock and air pollution are worsening.  The other half live in rural areas and smaller cities where community hospitals are on virtual life support.

“Let’s turn off that $40 billion tap that is flowing to noisy spinning turbines in Ontario’s once peaceful countryside.  Let’s use it to pay for practical green transit systems and caring community hospitals,” said Manning.  “Ontario has become occupied territory…occupied by the Big Wind developers.  Let’s get our Ontario back,” he said.

—30—

Contacts:          Garth Manning email gmanning@xplornet.com

Jim McPherson email ccsage@kos.net

Jane Wilson email  wco.president@gmail.com