Eastern Ontario wind farms: no community support

08 Saturday Aug 2015

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

Tags

Brinston, community opposition wind farms, Eastern Ontario wind farms, EDP Renewables, Farmers Forum, FIT, IESO, Not a Willing host, Premier Kathleen Wynne, subsidies for wind power, Tom Van Dusen North Dtormon, wind farm, wind mill, wind power, wind power LRP, wind turbines

Eastern Ontario wind farms: “enjoy the horizon while you still can”

From Farmers Forum, August 4, 2015

Community opposition to industrial-scale wind power mounting

Excerpt from “Eastern Limits” by Tom Van Dusen

I’m not sure what it is about North Stormont Township but wind power developers seem to love it.

Their calculations must have discovered more forceful winds than normal stirring the township. On the surface, though it seems no more or less windy than any other rural municipality.

In increasing numbers, developers have been wafting through the township looking for prime sites* to erect their industrial turbines. As in other communities where they’ve landed, their efforts have been the subject of increasing protests, petitions, and testy meetings.

Correctly gauging the way the wind is blowing on the issue, township council has just taken a stand against turbines and their proponents…for what that’s worth. With the provincial government relentlessly pushing wind power, it’s probably not worth much.**

Mayor Dennis Fife has explained that too many ratepayers are against wind projects for council to reasonably support them. Fife has expressed his personal opposition, claiming wind will never match nuclear power generation.

Typical of disgruntled ratepayers is Roger Villeneuve who worries that towers “much taller than any tree I’ve ever seen or will ever see” will soon dominate the local landscape.

…Council was helped along in its decision by Concerned Citizens of North Stormont which circulated an unwilling host petition, demanding that elected representatives back it at a meeting July 28. They did.

In explaining its opposition the citizens’ committee cited the loss of property values and prime agricultural land, increased hydro costs to cover wind power expansion, environmental impact on birds and bats, health issues related to pulsating noise and shadow flicker, and eventual decommissioning costs.

…Developers have been through all this before, in several other Ontario municipalities where they’ve landed. You see, they have carte blanche from the province under the Green Energy Act, trumping any local motions, opposing them. Projects are decided by the province’s Independent Electricity Service Operator [sic–it is “System” Operator] (IESO) with little regard for local concerns.***

…a growing number of wind power opponents are urging councils to use other tools at their disposal…one suggested option is refusing a bylaw to permit road access to turbine sites. ****

…

“Enjoy the natural horizon while there still is one,” says ratepayer Roger Villeneuve.

Wind Concerns Ontario notes:

* What they are looking for is willing landowners. Wind doesn’t really have much to do with it.

** The Not A Willing Host declaration stems directly from a statement by Premier Kathleen Wynne that she wouldn’t force wind power projects on communities that weren’t willing. Her failure to honour her word is underscored by the 89 (soon to be 90?) communities that have protested by municipal resolutions.

*** This is true but the failure of a developer to gain municipal support does not help them in a successful bid. Bids without community support are ranked lower.

**** This is not actually a valid option: several communities have tried this already and what happens is, the developer goes to the Ontario Energy Board which then grants permission to use road allowances. The municipality is then left without a road use agreement and possibility of compensation for the sometimes considerable damage to public roads.

Big Wind’s “Big Bonanza” in Ontario: subsidies benefit a few corporations, not ratepayers

04 Wednesday Feb 2015

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Consumer Policy Institute, FIT, George Smitherman, North Gower wind farm, Ontario, Ontario government, Ontario Power Authority, Pierre Poilievre, Prowind, subsidies for wind power, wind farm subsidies, wind farms Ontario, wind power, wind power subsidies

From the Financial Post Comment, February 4, by Brady Yauch, executive director the Consumer Policy Institute

When the Ontario government launched its Green Energy Act (GEA ) in 2009, it promised “new green economy jobs” and ” a wide range of economic opportunities.” Then Minister of Energy George Smitherman argued that the GEA would be a boon to Ontarians of all stripes: “We see opportunities in our rural communities for farmers, not just to lease their land for big companies that are the proponents of wind farms, but indeed for clusters of farmers to see themselves as investors in projects…. the emergence of thousands of smaller green energy projects—microgeneration—in urban as well as rural areas.”

Yes, everyone would need to pay a little more for renewable power, the public was told, but the benefits would be widely shared, for the ultimate benefit of all. As it turned out, power rates didn’t go up a little – they soared. And the subsidies weren’t widely shared among the folk – a handful of billion dollar companies pocketed most of them, most of them outside the province.

According to an analysis by the Consumer Policy Institute and Energy Probe, 90% of the wind subsidies went to just 11 companies, 80% of the subsidies went to nine companies with annual revenues over $1-billion, 60% of the subsidies went to six companies with more than $10-billion in annual revenue.

As for the province’s claim that it wants to create an Ontario-based “green economy,” less than 10% of subsidies to wind generators went to small-scale or local owners.

Since 2006, when the province first started subsidizing wind turbines, the province has provided more than $1.92 billion in subsidies. This act of corporate welfare is far from over.

According to the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) – the provincial agency in charge of energy planning and contracting – the province has signed deals for another 2,630 MW of wind energy to come on stream in the coming years, on top of the 3,065 MW already in commercial operation. All of that generation will receive above market rates courtesy of ratepayers for their output. In total, the amount of subsidies to wind producers could hit $8-billion over the next decade and $13-billion over the next 20 years.

The list of companies receiving the lion’s share of subsidies reads like a “who’s who” in Canada’s energy sector and corporate heavyweights. Brookfield Renewable Energy (a subsidiary of Brookfield Asset Management), Enbridge and Transalta alone accounted for about 38 percent of all subsidies handed out to wind generators. Those companies combined brought in $54-billion in total revenue in 2013.

Samsung, which posted $217-billion in revenue last year, is expected to triple its wind capacity in Ontario – and the subsidies that go along with it – in the next couple of years.

The damage to ratepayers for such policies has been significant. Since 2009 – when the GEA was introduced – ratepayers in Ontario have seen the commodity cost on their energy bills climb dramatically, with the regulated price of power over that time having increased on average by 56%, or just over 9% annually – more than five times the rate of inflation, making electricity price increases worse in Ontario than elsewhere in Canada.

To make matters worse, the high rates being pushed onto ratepayers has lowered demand for electricity across the province in recent years. That means Ontario now has a significant surplus of power, which it then exports to neighbouring jurisdictions at a loss. Ontario ratepayers are now subsidizing the energy consumption of households in America and other provinces.

Nearly everyone is losing when it comes to renewable energy in Ontario – except for those few companies that planted industrial wind turbines across the province and are receiving billions in subsidies for their effort.

Brady Yauch is an economist and the executive director of Consumer Policy Institute. bradyyauch@consumerpolicyinstitute.org

NOTE from Ottawa Wind Concerns: The Library of Parliament, on request from MP Pierre Poilievre, estimated that IF the wind power project proposed for the North Gower-Richmond area of Ottawa by Germany-based Prowind had gone ahead (it almost reached approval), the 20-MW project would have cost Ontario ratepayers $4.8 million per year.

Are Ontario wind power subsidies keeping Florida bills low? (Yes)

24 Friday Oct 2014

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

electricity bills Ontario, FIT, Florida Power and Light, gas plants, gas-fired power plants, hydro bills, natural gas, NextEra, NextEra Energy Inc, Ontario Power Authority, renewables, subsidies for wind farms, subsidies for wind power, wind power developers Ontario, wind power Ontario

Ontario: keeping Florida’s fossil-fuel power bills low

*Florida: plenty of natural gas-fired power. No wind*

Florida Power & Light Company (FPL), the largest subsidiary in NextEra Energy Inc’s portfolio with 4.7 million customers, is doing a fantastic job of keeping their rates low. In fact they have had declining rates for a few years as noted in this post from one of their webpages: “Bills Are Decreasing – Again! Since 2009, FPL’s typical 1,000-kWh customer bill has decreased by 7 percent. And in January 2015, FPL expects to decrease the typical residential customer bill by nearly $2 a month.”

While the FPL customers can currently consume 1,000 kWh a month at an all-in price of 10.2 cents/kWh, rates in Ontario have been increasing at about 10% annually. That 1,000 kWh purchased from Toronto Hydro will set you back $169.00 (65% higher) versus $102.00 from FPL. The natural and first inclination is to believe that it is probably due to their sources of electricity and perhaps their efficiency levels; while the latter is probably true (they claim 8,900 employees versus the 20,000 plus we have in Ontario) their sources of electricity only include a passing nod at renewables and then only “solar” which seems reasonable in the Sunshine State! The pie chart showing FPL’s “Fuel mix & purchased power” indicates at least 75% of electricity supplied to their ratepayers is fossil fuel-based. Solar provides just over a half of 1%!

*NextEra power sources: barely a nod to renewables in the U.S.*

Look at the parent company, NextEra: it generates electricity from wind turbines where the company can find subsidies. They rushed to Ontario to snap up at least six Ontario Power Authority (OPA) contracts with a rated capacity of just over 482 MW (megawatts). A quick calculation of that rated capacity discloses Ontario’s ratepayers will pay a lot of money to NextEra over the next 20 years, which NextEra can use to either pay dividends to their shareholders, or allow some of the revenue used to keep rates low in the Sunshine State for Canadian “Snowbirds.”

The 482 MW of rated capacity should produce power at 29% of capacity, which means they should generate about 1.2 million MWh (megawatt hours). The equation therefore is as follows: 482 MW @ 29% X 8760 hours in a year X $135 per MWh x 20 years = $3.2 billion. That means revenue per FPL customer of about $35 per year. If only $2 finds its way to FPL’s customers, it will help to keep the rates down.

Ironically, Ontario’s Snowbirds pay much higher rates at home; no wonder Canadians own more property in Florida than citizens from the next five nationalities combined! Too bad their winter electricity bills will be waiting for them when they get back home.

©Parker Gallant

October 23, 2014

The views expressed are those of the author.

Reposted from Wind Concerns Ontario http://www.windconcernsontario.ca

Lisa MacLeod roars on the Green Energy Act!

06 Thursday Mar 2014

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

cost benefit wind power, FIT program, Green Energy Act, Lisa MacLeod, subsidies for wind power, wind power Ontario

Yesterday was the occasion for debate on the Green Energy Act, as the government is now scrambling to correct its domestic input policy—illegal as determined by the World economic regulatory body.

Nepean-Carleton MPP and PC Energy Critic Lisa MacLeod covered the gamut of problems with the Green Energy Act in her speech. You may read the full account here (recommended). An excerpt follows:

…But if they want to talk about children’s health, I’ll talk about a child’s health. I’ll talk about Madi Vanstone, who every day we’ve brought up in the assembly here. I can’t help but think that the Ontario that I live in, the Ontario that I’m raising my daughter in, is spending $22 billion for 1% of energy to make Liberal friends rich when little girls in this province who need life-saving drugs can’t get them. And why can’t she get them? Because this Premier said it costs too much. She said that it costs too much; we couldn’t afford it. We could afford to make Mike Crawley a rich man, we can afford to make NextEra a rich company and we can ensure that Samsung basically has a seat at the cabinet table here, but apparently our government cannot and will not choose to support a child who needs help. That’s the reality that we’re in in Ontario today. People can’t understand it. It was well documented, I thought, by Christina Blizzard. I thought she laid out the case on that quite clearly, and I thought that she pointed out what most people in Ontario are saying.

You look at the cost of power now—and I had the opportunity to speak to the supply motion, I guess it was a week ago. I talked about the opportunity I had to visit many of my colleagues’ ridings and talk to many people who are in their communities, and we talked about the high cost of energy and how that is hurting the people of this province and hurting manufacturers, and we talked about what our plan would be.

We’ve written a number of white papers. Some of them were just, effectively, ideas that we put forward that we’ll run on; others were ideas for discussion that we’ve talked about. But, very clearly, people are looking for a rational solution to the mismanagement by the government.

We’ve put forward a number of, I think, very thoughtful ideas and very sensible ideas to review not only the existing Green Energy Act—I think we’ve been very clear that we would repeal it—but we also talked about looking at some of the entities that we have in Ontario, like the OPG and Hydro One, monetizing them to bring more accountability. We know that there are some very serious and straightforward concerns there. We know, for example, that we’re exporting about $1 billion worth of power. …

You think about this: He has just acknowledged in this House that to create 1.1% of power is $22 billion. They had to acknowledge, albeit it was the Auditor General who forced them, that it was $1.1 billion for them to save five seats. With that amount of waste and that amount of mismanagement, we could not only eradicate our deficit, but we could make significant investments into our communities in health care and education, and we would still have power that we wouldn’t have to export. A novel idea, Speaker, but that is the reality; it is the truth, and it is something that we have said consistently—and the only party to do so since 2009.

That’s why we stand here day in and day out. We stand for the people in Strathroy and Stratford. We talk to the people in Cobourg, the people in Oxford and the people in Barry’s Bay. We talk about the people who are opposing these high subsidies and who are opposing these invasions on their land. We talk to them. We ask them to stay in Ontario and make sure that they continue to support us so that we can change this.

…

Let me be abundantly clear, Speaker: This is a government who is too concerned with its own ideology, and too concerned with its buddies that they could make a little bit more rich, that they had no concern whatsoever about the people paying the bill; that they have no concern whatsoever of the broader implications in an international trade war that they have now thrust us into. They don’t care, Speaker. They didn’t do their job at the beginning.

They’re not doing their job now, they didn’t do their job then, and everybody in Ontario is paying for it.

Germany to slash Feed in Tariffs subsidies for wind

09 Saturday Nov 2013

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

cost-benefit analysis wind power, FIT, Germany, subsidies for wind power

Let’s hope this trend comes to Ontario, too; Ontario has always said it was following the example of Germany in pursuing “renewable” sources of power. Can we hope the government will now see what has gone so very wrong?

Better ways to spend $40 billion in Ontario

20 Thursday Jun 2013

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Health, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

air pollution Ontario, CCSAGE, County Coalition for Safe Affordable Green Energy, Feed In Tariff Ontario, FIT Ontario, Garth Manning QC, GTA, Ontario hospitals, prince Edward County, subsidies for wind power, Toronto gridlock, transit GTA, transit Ontario, transit Toronto, wind power Ontario

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 20^TH, 2013– On June 17^th 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

Ottawa Wind Concerns

~ A safe environment for everyone

Tag Archives: subsidies for wind power

Eastern Ontario wind farms: no community support

Community opposition to industrial-scale wind power mounting

Big Wind’s “Big Bonanza” in Ontario: subsidies benefit a few corporations, not ratepayers

Are Ontario wind power subsidies keeping Florida bills low? (Yes)

Ontario: keeping Florida’s fossil-fuel power bills low

Lisa MacLeod roars on the Green Energy Act!

Germany to slash Feed in Tariffs subsidies for wind

Better ways to spend $40 billion in Ontario