Tag Archives: OPG

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.

Advertisement

Economist: Ontario’s actions on electricity bills possibly illegal

12 Saturday Apr 2014

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

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

From Ottawa energy economist Robert Lyman:

THE $6.2 BILLION SLEIGHT-OF-HAND

 Parker Gallant is a retired banker who has done tremendous service to the people of Ontario by reporting publicly on the Ontario government’s mismanagement of the province’s electrical energy system. In an analysis he posted on April 11, 2014, Mr. Gallant applied his knowledge of financial management and accounting to reveal the damaging and possibly illegal actions of the Liberal government with respect to the Debt Retirement Charge included in the monthly electricity bills of Ontario residents. The analysis can be found online here:

http://ep.probeinternational.org/2014/04/11/parker-gallant-the-debt-retirement-charge-premier-wynnes-6-2-billion-revenue-tool-5/#more-12245

This note offers my explanation, in layperson’s terms, of what Mr. Gallant revealed.

Background

In 1998 the Ontario government launched a major restructuring of the province’s publicly-owned electricity industry. One aspect of this restructuring was the breakup of Ontario Hydro into five successor companies on April 1, 1999.

The Ontario Ministry of Finance determined that, on April 1, 1999, Ontario Hydro’s total debt and other liabilities stood at $38.1 billion, which greatly exceeded the estimated $17.2 billion market value of the assets being transferred to the new entities. The resulting shortfall of $20.9 billion was determined to be “stranded debt”, representing the total debt and other liabilities of Ontario Hydro that the Ministry judged could not be serviced in “a competitive electricity environment”. This total was subsequently reduced to $19.4 billion when it was adjusted for $1.5 billion of additional assets transferred to OEFC. Responsibility for servicing and managing the “legacy” debt of Ontario Hydro, which includes the stranded debt, was given to the Ontario Electricity Financial Corporation (OEFC), whose opening balance sheet reflected a stranded debt, or unfunded liability, of $19.4 billion. This was the difference between the $18.7 billion value of assets assumed by the OEFC and the $38.1 billion of Ontario Hydro legacy debt.

To retire the debt, the government established a long-term plan wherein the burden of debt repayment would be borne partly through dedicated revenues from the electricity sector companies – Ontario Power Generation (OPG), Hydro One, and Municipal Electrical Utilities – and partly by electricity consumers directly. (Bear in mind that all the revenues from the electricity sector companies come from electricity consumers, so electricity consumers pay all the costs, one way or the other.). The electricity companies would make “payments in lieu of taxes” to the OEFC (this is, in theory, the equivalent of corporate income taxes). It was projected that future revenues from OPG and Hydro One and municipal electricity distributors would generate $11.6 billion over the next eight to nine years.

To read the full article click here.THE $6.2 Billion Sleight-of-Hand

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Big Becky cost overruns: how come nobody got fired?

28 Tuesday Jan 2014

Posted by in Ottawa

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Parker gallant on Big Becky: what is THAT going to cost you?

BigBecky

The big hole where your money goes

 

In February 2010 an article penned for the Financial Post I disclosed that the Ontario Power Generation’s OPG) new Niagara tunnel (“Big Becky”) was not only running late but had incurred substantial cost overruns—in excess of $600 million, in fact.
The effects of that overrun have not affected our electricity prices yet, but the writing is now on the wall based on the OPG application of September 27, 2013.  The increases requested in that rate application by OPG, if approved, will increase electricity rates by at least $6-7.00 per month ($72-84.00 annually) for the average 800-kilowatt (per month) consumer.   According to the submissions to the Ontario Energy Board (OEB), all of OPG’s “regulated” hydro rates will increase from 3.9 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) to 4.4 cents per kWh due to the costs of the tunnel.  One-half a cent doesn’t sound like much, but when you consider that in 2012, OPG produced 18.5 billion kWh of unregulated hydro, it is time to bring out the calculators.
That overrun effectively means OPG is seeking to recover about $96 million annually for the cost of “Big Becky” for the next 50 years (amortization period), which equates to $4.6 billion for a tunnel originally estimated by OPG in the business case presented to their Board of Directors in 2005, to cost $873 million. It has cost 70% over that amount.
OPG is seeking approval for the foregoing as a rate increase for their “regulated” hydro as Big Becky is classified; that means it is considered “baseload” generation and its cost of production will be close to 10 cents a kWh.  At the same time they are also seeking approval for an even larger increase in their “unregulated” hydro which could generate as much as $300 million and was the cause of the media focus when they discovered the application.  The “anti-nuclear” lobby painted it as a rate increase related to OPG’s nuclear refurbishment plans, which was a false premise.
What the cost overrun on “Big Becky” demonstrates is that oversight at Queens Park is sadly lacking in the energy portfolio.   It is disconcerting to realize that this project was $600 million over budget, yet to the best of the writer’s knowledge no OPG employee or Board member was castigated or lost their job. A private sector firm would investigate and allocate “cause” to one or several individuals in the event a project of this size exceeded budget by a factor of 70%.
Perhaps it is time to privatize the electricity sector as the private, but regulated, natural gas sector has demonstrated they can do a much better job.
©Parker Gallant                                                                                                                                           January 25, 2014
The views expressed here are those of the author.
Reposted from Wind Concerns Ontario windconcernsontario.ca