• About
  • BRINSTON/SOUTH BRANCH/NORTH DUNDAS/NORTH STORMONT
  • Donate!
  • Ottawa’s “Energy Evolution”: wind turbines coming to rural communities
  • Wind Concerns Ontario

Ottawa Wind Concerns

~ A safe environment for everyone

Ottawa Wind Concerns

Tag Archives: OPA

Wind farm still a concern in Ottawa

20 Wednesday Aug 2014

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Dan Scharf, EDP Renewables, municipal election Ontario, Ontario Power Authority, OPA, Ottawa wind concerns, Scott Moffatt, South Branch, South Branch wind farm, wind energy, wind farm, wind farm North Gower, wind farm Richmond

People attending a community meeting in North Gower last evening expressed continuing concern about the wind power project that was proposed in 2008 for North Gower-Richmond. The project application has been suspended pending a new application under the Request for Proposal process, which will open in a few weeks.

According to documents obtained by Ottawa Wind Concerns via the Freedom of Information process (thanks to donations from the community) the wind power developer Prowind, was informed of the application suspension in June, 2013, but advised to keep in touch with their contact at the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) about the new opportunity to apply. Prowind maintains a listing for the project on its website.

At that time, Prowind’s documents were “deemed complete” by the OPA, and the company was waiting for a connection to the grid, before the approval process could continue.

Prowind advised The Ottawa Citizen in August 2013, that the company would review the terms of the new process, and re-apply, if appropriate.

In October of 2013, a legal petition bearing more than 1,200 signatures from area residents was presented to the City of Ottawa; council passed a motion that recognized the petition and further, asked the province for a return of local land-use planning powers.

Statements to the effect that the project is now dead are not correct; the OPA has not yet defined its “community engagement” requirement under the new process.

Meanwhile, the OPA has designated Eastern Ontario as a “green light” area for wind power development.

It is expected that the wind power project will be an issue in the upcoming municipal election; incumbent councillor Scott Moffatt wrote a report on the project in last week’s Manotick Messenger, and candidate Dan Scharf has stated he is opposed to it.

The South Branch project, also developed by Prowind and sold to US-based EDP Renewables, has been operating south of Ottawa since March; the turbines are the first 3-megawatt power generators in Ontario.

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com 

Advertisement

Parker Gallant: why your electricity bills are so high

06 Thursday Feb 2014

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Bob Chiarelli, cost-benefit analysis wind power, IESO, Ontario electricity bills, OPA, Parker Gallant

Tell me again:  why have Ontario’s electricity rates gone up so much?

If you live in an Ontario city and just received your first electricity bill for the year, you are probably looking at it and scratching your head!   Wow, did we really use that much electricity for those lights on the Christmas tree?

The answer is, no, you didn’t, but your electricity rates and your delivery rates have climbed a lot over the past several years, even though you may have used less electricity.

Ontario’s electricity sector is very big with annual revenues of about $20 billion (approximately 4.5% of total 2012 Ontario primary household income).  The sector has been undergoing massive changes over the past decade as the current Liberal government, supported by the NDP, decided we should go “green” and save the world from global warming or its current iteration, “climate change.”

So exactly what has caused the price of electricity in Ontario to rise at a level we haven’t seen in our lifetime?   Here is a list of the principal changes that have affected our electricity bills during the past decade. Many will continue to push our bills even higher over the ten years.   They are in no particular order and remember, they all cost you money.

§     $230 million for taxpayers and almost $900 million for ratepayers to move the gas plants.

§     $60-$70 million annually—the Ontario Power Authority or OPA’s budget. One of our “energy ministers” created the temporary (OPA) instructing them to develop a Integrated Power System Plan.  It’s no longer temporary even though it has never produced an acceptable plan.

§     $300 million plus annually for the OPA to run the province’s “conservation” program, to pick up your old fridge, provide coupons for purchases of lightbulbs and thermostats.

§     Rate increases: when you actually conserve electricity the program allows your local distribution company (LDC) to apply to the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) for a rate increase on their delivery rates because they lost revenue.

§     More: the same program supports local municipalities to convert their street lights to LED bulbs.

§     $20 billion, now reduced to $13 billion, for the OPA to sign that Samsung contract to pay them for putting up wind turbines and solar panels and (maybe) produce power over the 20-year contract.

§     70.2 cents per kilowatt for the OPA to develop the feed-in tariff (FIT) program which pays various school boards to put solar panels on school roofs, or for IKEA, Loblaws and Canadian Tire, etc. to put them on their stores, and then charge them 8 or 9 cents to buy back the power.

§     $11 billion because the energy minister(s) instructed Hydro One (transmission & distribution monopoly) to spend on both transmission and distribution assets, including a big chunk just to hook up solar panels and wind turbines.

§      $700.54 for each of Hydro One’s 1.1 million smart meters—a lot more than other LDCs spent. The total cost of smart meters for the province is around $2 billion .

§     Despite all that spending on smart meters Hydro One is continually messing up their distribution customer’s hydro bills due to faulty meters and a billing system that doesn’t work very well.(One radio commentator said it’s in constant “FAIL” mode.)

§     1,700 employees at Hydro One up 39% since 2005, but they actually distribute less electricity now than they did then.

§     $4.8 billion, as of spring 2013 for pension shortfalls at OPG and Hydro One. Ratepayers are on the hook for and must pay for through their monthly bills.

§     $600 million: the amount OPG went over budget on the Big Becky tunnel under Niagara Falls.

§     $2.6 billion because OPG was directed to move forward with the Mattagami project, for run-of-river hydro which will produce power principally in the spring when we won’t really need it.

§     $6 billion, the amount the Energy Minister recently said we made in “profit” selling our excess power but ratepayers subsidize those exports at a cost of over $1 billion every year.

§     We now pay wind turbine developers to not produce power and we also pay solar farm developers for not producing power because it might put Ontario’s grid at risk for blackouts or brownouts.

§     We now pay for meteorological stations to be erected at wind developments to measure how much power they might have produced, but we can’t use, and pay for it anyway.

§     Five: the top five executives at Hydro One earned almost twice as much as Hydro One paid out under the LEAP (Low-income Energy Assistance Program) grant program which was developed to alleviate “energy poverty.”

§     $7.7 billion: in 2005 when the Global Adjustment was called the Provincial Benefit it actually was a benefit and reduced electricity bills by $53.1 million, but for 2013 it was a charge on ratepayer’s bills that exceeded $7.7 billion.

§     $1.2 billion: on July 1, 2010 the Province started collecting the provincial portion of the HST and that 8% tax increase now costs ratepayers at least $1.2 billion annually.

§     140%: the amount the “Off-Peak” time-of-use rates have risen since they first appeared, moving them closer to “On-Peak” rates—so much for encouraging power consumption to off-peak hours as a conservation measure.

§     Discounts to big industry: because Ontario has added so much generation our Energy Minister has directed the OPA to start two new industrial incentive programs that will allow big industry to pay for electricity at huge discounts similar to what we are paid for our exports which ordinary ratepayers will subsidize.

§     3,600 megawatts of wind and 1,200 MW of solar: what the OPA has contracted for which will all be paid for at above market prices, and will push that Global Adjustment pot up much further than it was in 2013.

§     The “renewable generation connection” charge: what we pay for Hydro One to connect wind and solar projects to the grid.

§     $12 billion: what Ontario’s ratepayers have handed over to pay off the residual stranded debt of $7.8 billion but here’s the bad news—there is still $3.9 billion to be paid.

§     $1.5 billion: the cost for the Province via the IESO to develop a “smart grid,” some of which is now appearing on our bills under the “regulatory” line.

§     $200 to 400 million a year, we pay to subsidize electricity consumption for large industrial users.

§     $1 billion a year: what we pay gas generators through a “net revenue requirement,” so they can be at the ready when the wind’s not blowing or the sun is not shining.

§     $ 1 billion a year and more: what taxpayers have been paying for the past four years to provide ratepayers with a “Ontario Clean Energy Benefit” of 10%. It expires in one year, meaning electricity bills will jump by 10% more.

So, no, it wasn’t your Christmas lights that jacked up your bill.  Here’s hoping a light goes on somewhere in the halls at Queen’s Park, and the government takes action to stop this madness.

©Parker Gallant

February 3, 2014

The opinions expressed are those of the author.

How will wind developers rate in new procurement process?

01 Saturday Feb 2014

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

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

North Gower wind farm, OPA, OSEA, Prowind, Richmond wind farm, wind farms and health effects, wind farms and property values, wind power Eastern Ontario

Large (over 500 kW or 1/2 a megawatt) renewable power projects will soon be required to go through a new process in Ontario. The details are not final (yet the province is holding little dog and pony shows for “engagement”) but one of the ideas is that power developers must now “qualify” to be able to submit a bid to create a power project.

The presentation the Ontario Power Authority delivered on January 22nd via a webinar is here: http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/sites/default/files/planning/LRP-Presentation-January-22-2014.pdf

Pay close attention to the map on page 12–there appears to be “no limit” for Eastern Ontario.

“Community engagement” is a mandatory requirement in the new process but there is still “no veto,” as the OPA says clearly.

Throughout the summer there will be “ongoing engagement activities” scheduled. This is when the so-called charitable organization, the Ontario Sustainable Energy Association or OSEA, at the behest of the government, and paid to do this, will travel through Ontario to tell us how wonderful wind power is. As to community concerns, if you follow our Twitter (@northgowerwind) you will have seen our conversations with OSEA Board member and Ottawa resident Chris Young. Concerned about your property values? Health? In Mr Young’s opinion, you should get out your roll of aluminum foil and refashion yourself a hat because you’re nuts. Health claims are “bogus” and concerns about property values (amply demonstrated by research studies in Ontario) are the result of a “whipped up frenzy.”

The process starts this month. We will try to keep you informed but why not sign yourself up for emails from the OPA by registering here.

We have been fighting for our community for four years; 2014 is going to be a year of dramatic events.

Donations welcome for our post office box, communications, public meetings, and legal advice. PO Box 3 North Gower ON  K0A 2T0

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

 

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

07 Monday Oct 2013

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

cost benefit wind power, cost-benefit renewable power, Dalton McGuinty, Feed In Tariff Ontario, Kathleen Wynne, Ontario electricity bills, OPA, Parker Gallant

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.

Impact of Ottawa wind power project would be ‘staggering’

16 Tuesday Jul 2013

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

cost benefit wind power, cost-benefit renewable power, Green Energy Act, health effects wind farms, health effects wind power, IESO, infrasound wind turbines, Lisa MacLeod, North Gower wind farm, Ontario government power projects, OPA, Ottawa wind concerns, Pierre Poilievre, Richmond wind farm, siting power projects, wind power project Ottawa

Community group Ottawa Wind Concerns has filed a formal comment with the Ontario Power Authority and the Independent Electricity System Operator as part of the “dialogue” process on siting large power projects in Ontario.

Placing a huge wind power project as proposed in the North Gower and Richmond communities, part of the City of Ottawa, would have “staggering” effects, the group says, in terms of negative health impacts and on property values.

On a day when wind power is contributing considerably less than one percent to Ontario’s power needs during the current heat wave, OWC’s chair Jane Wilson said that a thorough cost-benefit analysis, including comparison to other forms of power generation and the impact on communities, should be done for this and every wind power project.

“Ontario needs a new process,” she says. “That starts with a return of local land use planning and the recognition that wind power projects should be treated as any other type of infrastructure.”

MP Pierre Poilievre, MPP Lisa MacLeod and Ottawa City Councillor have all expressed opposition to the wind power project.

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Read the full comment document here: OPA-commentJuly11

Donations welcome, please mail to PO Box 3, North Gower ON  K0A 2T0

Cancelled gas plants: what’s another 20,000 pages?

12 Friday Oct 2012

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Ottawa, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Atikokan power plant, Bill Mauro MPP, cancelled gas plants Ontario, Chris Bentley, McGuinty government, Mississauga gas plant, MPP Bentley contempt, Oakville gas plant, Ontario Power Authority, OPA, Ottawa wind concerns, Parker Gallant, Robert Lyman

The big news out of Queen’s Park today is that while the Liberals thought they had complied with The Speaker’s request for documents pertaining to the Oakville and Mississauga gas plant cancellations (if you can call hundreds of blank pages complying with anything), there appears to have been an Oops!

Turns out now, the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) has discovered 20,000 more pages of documents connected to the cancellations.

In a nutshell, the Liberal government cancelled the plants because the people in Oakville and Mississauga–who NEED the power–didn’t want them, and an election was coming. So, now the government has decided to move them, guess where, rural locations, and then build the capacity it needs in the form of new transmission lines, new gas lines, whatever, so the resource hinterland of rural Ontario can feed Toronto.

How much is this costing you? Plenty.

Here is a summary from Ottawa Wind Concerns friend Robert Lyman, a former director in the federal government who was involved in energy policy.

ONTARIO ELECTRICITY RATEPAYERS – PAYING FOR POLITICS

Over the past year, there have been a series of announcements by Brad Duguid, Ontario Minister of Energy and his successor, Chris Bentley, about the construction of electricity generation projects in the province. Those announcements have all been related closely to the October 7, 2011 provincial election, which the Liberals won with a minority. Unfortunately, few citizens have understood the implications of the announcements.

This may have changed due to the work of two experts: Parker Gallant, a retired banker who has devoted several years to monitoring and reporting on the financial performance of Ontario’s electrical energy Crown Corporations and Bruce Sharp, an electrical engineer. You can read their excellent analyses in the online version of the Financial Post (“Ontario’ Power Trip: The $733 million gas boondoggle” by Bruce Sharp, and “Atikokan Conversion – Another Seat Saver for the Liberals!” by Parker Gallant). Their analyses are obscured, however, by the complexity of the subject matter. I will attempt to make it clearer.

Atikokan

In the period leading up to the 2011 provincial election, there were a number of announcements concerning electrical energy generation in the Atikokan area:

  • On September 11, 2011, Brad Duguid announced that the existing 200 MW Atikokan coal plant would be convert to biomass. Subsequent announcements promised that the contractor, Aecon, would complete the conversion for $170 million and that there would be 200 construction jobs for two years.
  • Chris Bentley subsequently announced that the Ontario Power Authority had contracted for the supply of 200 MW of electrical energy from wind turbines and solar generation.

These announcements were well received by the residents of Atikokan. In the 2011 election, MPP Bill Mauro of Thunder Bay Atikokan beat out the NDP candidate by 39% to 37%; this was less than 500 votes.

 

Subsequent analysis by Parker Gallant revealed some interesting things:

  • The contractor, Aecon, has contributed more than $45,000 to the Liberal Party of Ontario over the past four years and the Liberal Government has appointed the Aecon CEO to the Board of Directors of the Ontario Power Authority since its creation.
  • Over the last two years, the Atikokan coal plant has produced power at 2.6% of its capacity, which means that it has not been needed to support Ontario’s demands.
  • The conversion of the Atikokan plant to biomass (which would use wood chips as fuel) would actually reduce its ability to produce power from 175,000 to 140,000 megawatt hours.
  • As wind and solar energy plants produce electricity on an intermittent basis (i.e. when the wind blows and the sun shines), they are not sufficiently reliable to serve the needs of the pulp and paper plants in the area. This will require the construction of an east/west transmission line at a cost of $600 million to ensure reliability of energy supply to the region.
  • Considering the cost of the coal plant conversion, of the subsidies to the wind and solar plants and of the east-west transmission line, the total expenditures in this area will be close to $1 billion.

Oakville

Prior to the 2011 election, there was considerable controversy over the proposal by TransCanada Energy Corp., under contract to the Ontario Power Authority (OPA), to build a 900-megawatt natural gas-fired generating station near Oakville. The Ontario Cabinet decided, in the face of the controversy, to breach the $1.2 billion contract with TransCanada and to build the plant instead in Lennox, Ontario on land held by the government-owned Ontario Power Generation (OPG).

On September 24, 2012, Chris Bentley announced that a settlement had been reached between OPA and TransCanada over the breach of contract. The announcement focused on two payments to TransCanada – $40 million to cover sunk costs and a $210 million “turbine payment”, which was not explained.

The details that have emerged subsequently are as follows:

  • The turbine payment is an elaborate shell game. OPA has agreed to pay TransCanada $210 million for two gas turbines at the new plant. By 2017, when the new plant is completed, OPA will be sitting on a $210 million liability. When the plant starts producing electricity, TransCanada will repay the $210 million over the 20-year term of the contract, using revenues received from Ontario ratepayers. Under Ontario’s green-energy plan, even if the Lennox plant’s power is not needed, electricity ratepayers will still pay for the electricity they don’t need.
  • It is likely that the plant will not be needed. It will be located right next to an existing OPG plant that is seldom needed. When that plant does operate, it sells electricity into the export market below cost.
  • The turbine payment was far too high. If the plant had been located at Oakville, TransCanada would have been fully compensated for its costs with a payment of $113 million, $97 million less than the government has agreed to pay.
  • The gas services costs for the Lennox site, further away from the natural gas hub, may be higher than anticipated. Bruce Sharp estimates that they will be $346 million over the 20-year project term.
  • Locating the power plant farther away from the GTA will require up to $250 million in additional transmission facilities.
  • The total estimated cost of moving the project from Oakville to Lennox may thus be $733 million. This does not include other, to-be-determined costs, such as the compensation that will have to be paid to Ontario Power Generation for its land at Lennox. The figures contrast sharply with the $40 million the Ontario government has been citing.

Mississauga

The Atikokan and Oakville plants are in addition to the $190 million that the Ontario government had to pay to cancel a plant that would have been built in Mississauga. Similar to the Oakville decision, the cancellation of the Mississauga plant, made two weeks before the election, was followed by a decision to build the needed gas plant in Lambton, near Sarnia, which will add significantly to the electricity transmission costs.

In May, 1997, the MacDonald Commission issued its report recommending that the Ontario government introduce more competition into Ontario’s electricity system, including privatization of Ontario Hydro. Fifteen years later, electricity remains a publicly-owned and managed political football in Ontario.  Consumers will continue to pay dearly until this is changed.

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@yahoo.ca

Donations welcome for legal advice etc PO Box 3 North Gower ON   K0A 2T0

(Our mailbox is courtesy of the generous donation from a community member—thank you!)

Recent Posts

  • Net Zero, renewables, natural gas ban a hot issue in Eastern Ontario
  • What do we know about Battery Energy Storage? Not much
  • Ottawa Council votes unanimously to hold approvals of new power generation installations until protective bylaws in place
  • Rural councillors propose motion to protect health, safety
  • Prince Edward County rejects battery storage proposal

Follow me on Twitter

My Tweets

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Tags

Bob Chiarelli electricity bills Ontario Green Energy Act IESO Ontario Ottawa wind concerns wind farm wind farms wind power wind turbines

Contact us

PO Box 3 North Gower ON K0A 2T0

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Ottawa Wind Concerns
    • Join 369 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Ottawa Wind Concerns
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar