| MEDIA & RELEASES: Power Plant |
 |
 |
|
See also MIRANET articles: NANTICOKE SOLUTION: MIRANET YouTube video (released May 31, 2010): Why NOT Nanticoke?. The Nanticoke Solution is a win-win for residents of the Clarkson-Oakville Airshed and Haldimand County, Ontario ... Why NOT Nanticoke?. CLICK BELOW to view on YouTube.
TRANSCANADA RESPONSE: Mississauga News letter to the editor, by John Mikkelsen, Development Manager, TransCanada (June 3, 2010): Nanticoke won’t work. Excerpt: "[MIRANET's] coverage of the power plant issue could use some balance. It’s misleading to state that the power facility planned for Oakville could be simply moved to Nanticoke. ... Those charged with running our power system did a thorough assessment of the power supply problem and solutions in the southwest GTA. The best solution is a new natural gas-fired power plant in the southwest GTA corridor. By the way, I’m a resident of south Mississauga." MIRANET comment: Thanks for the dollar figures...most helpful...will write soon. Reverse media and releases chronology is further below NOTE: The Town of Oakville provides the latest information about the town's actions to improve air quality, and information related to the proposed TransCanada power plant in the Clarkson-Oakville Airshed, at its new webpage: Health and Air Quality Protection. NOTE ON THE AIR QUALITY TASK FORCE: This month our Clean Air Subcommittee has been focused on providing input to the Air Quality Task Force, based on the Draft Report and Action Plan circulated to members of the Community Advisory Committee by Dr. David Balsillie, the Task Force Chair. After the last meeting of the CAC on Thursday, June 17, we await the final Report by the end of June, at which point MIRANET can publish its comments. MIRANET DEPUTATION: The MIRANET Clean Air Subcommittee made a Deputation to Mississauga Council: May 26, 2010 (click to view), concerning the proposed air quality by-law for Mississauga, further to the Corporate Report dated May 13, 2010 from the Commissioner of Community Services, entitled Potential Fine Particulate Matter (FPM) By-law for Mississauga (click to view the 14p PDF). The report outlines what would be required to introduce a FPM by-law in Mississauga similar to the Town of Oakville's by-law. Click here for the Council Agenda. Click for the MIRANET article about Oakville By-law 2010-035. During the deputation, Council members were shown a 2-minute partial 'rough cut' of MIRANET's YouTube video about the Nanticoke solution, currently finishing production. Later, on a Motion by Councillor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , seconded by Councillor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , Council voted unanimously to defer the Corporate Report pending specified reports, and to support the Town of Oakville in requesting provincial regulation of PM2.5 emissions. The Council Motion will be posted here shortly, and the Video once available. CLICK HERE FOR THE PHOTO ALBUM OF OUR NANTICOKE FIELD TRIP: (annotations pending; best viewed at 53% zoom). The MIRANET Clean Air Subcommittee traveled to Haldimand County on May 14, 2010 to tour the 4500-acre Nanticoke Industrial Park, view the transmission corridor and shoot some video (to be posted on YouTube). Click for the MIRANET article about the Nanticoke option.
Click here to view the photo album (20-slide PDF; may take a moment to load; may be viewed at 100% or more for fine detail) Wall Street Journal book review (April 30, 2010): The wrong way to get green ... prepare to be underwhelmed and underpowered. A review of Power Hungry: The Myths of "Green Energy" and the Real Fuels of the Future, by Robert Bryce. See entry (by date) further below for excerpt. Click for more information in the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy. Click on map to enlarge image.
MIRANET RESPONSE: We have now posted our Clean Air Statement: April 16, 2010 (click to view) in response to TransCanada's recent PR video (left) concerning the proposed Oakville Generating Station, as contracted with the Ontario Power Authority (OPA).
This video is a simplistic, but entirely accurate, presentation of the Ontario government’s own rationalizations (myths) behind its flawed Green Energy Strategy. These myths become 'conventional wisdom' if they are not examined and refuted. For this reason, we have posted the video -- so that citizens might understand the defects in their own government's policy. MIRANET takes heart from the necessity which TransCanada felt to make this video, which is clearly directed at shoring up the government's beseiged strategy. Click to view the MIRANET Presentation: Dec. 9, 2009 on "The Top Ten Myths" being perpetuated (slide 9). These myths are all evident in this video.
Oakville Beaver editorial (June 29, 2010): What does it take? Excerpt: "What does it take to get the Ministry of Environment’s attention? What does it take to make Premier Dalton McGuinty and his government to admit that the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) made a mistake when it selected TransCanada’s proposed 900-megawatt gas-fueled power plant on Royal Windsor Drive as the lottery winner of the Southwest GTA Replacement Power Plant sweepstakes. ... we have to wonder whether the recently released report by the South West GTA Air Quality Task Force and its 30 recommendations will finally get the attention of the government. ... If adopted, the recommendations would seem to put an end to any plans of building a gas-fired power plant in the Oakville-Clarkson airshed. However, although the air quality task force was formed by the minister of environment last fall, there is no requirement to make the recommendations binding. The Province can simply ignore the findings of its own task force and continue business as usual with its head planted firmly in the sand. We can only hope that the Province will finally see the light, admit its mistake, and follow the advice of its own task force." Click here for the MIRANET article about the Task Force Report. Oakville Beaver article (June 18, 2010): TransCanada files challenge against air quality bylaw. Excerpt: "TransCanada Energy has launched a court challenge of an Oakville bylaw it claims is vague, unreasonable and 'enacted in bad faith for the improper purpose of preventing, delaying or frustrating the construction and operation of the Oakville Generating Station.' The company, which has been given a provincial contract to build and operate a 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant on Ford Motor Company land at 1500 Royal Windsor Dr., filed its challenge of the Town’s Health Protection Air Quality Bylaw last week. The application asks the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to quash the bylaw, which the company claims exceeds the Town’s legislative authority, was enacted in bad faith, contravenes existing environmental legislation and is invalid due to vagueness. As well, the application asks the court to rule that the company had the legal right to use the property for the generation of electricity as of March 31, 1999, and to permit that use of the property 'despite any bylaw, or any other land use control or prohibition of the Town of Oakville.' ... In a letter to Town of Oakville lawyer Doug Carr, solicitors for TransCanada note that they are requesting the court combine the hearing of this new application with a previous one filed by the company challenging the Town’s interim control bylaw concerning new power plants."
Mississauga Business Times opinion column (June 2010): Gas plants versus invisible truths. Excerpt: "Only three years ago, residents of urban communities in southern Ontario were told by Premier Dalton McGuinty that invisible "natural" gas delivers clean power and because of that it is a godsend. Thanks to naysayers like power plant guru Brian Holtham [member of MIRANET's Clean Air Subcommittee], however, they're learning quickly that a 900-megawatt gas-fired plant can and will deliver more pollution to its host community such as Oakville, Clarkson or Lakeview than a 2,200-megawatt coal-based plant. ... Gas-smoke plumes are not as warm and they fall to earth within a distance of 300 to 1,700 metres. ... Holtham, with 30 years' experience in power-plant operations, extracted information for his pollution deductions from TransCanada Pipelines' own 1,700-page document covering its Oakville gas-plant proposal. But Councillors and ratepayers are suggesting a constructive alternative: Build it, or a bigger one, or several of them, near the Nanticoke coal-fired plant which is scheduled for closing and has ideal transmission infrastructure."
Globe and Mail opinion column, by Marcus Gee (June 8, 2010): NIMBYs oppose new forms of power generation. Excerpt: "A new wave of NIMBYism is breaking out in and around Toronto. As Ontario moves away from coal as an energy source, the provincial government is planning new natural-gas power plants and wind turbines to help make that critical shift. Around the region, residents are saying: Not In My Back Yard. ... The obvious question for these groups is: What would you have Ontario do instead? ... Unless we all go back to candle-power and the horse and buggy, the power lost by cutting out coal has to come from somewhere. Natural gas, the cleanest of fossil fuels, is a good alternative. ... Wind, it goes without saying, is an even cleaner energy source, though the cost is high and the economics are dodgy. Local residents who oppose these new wind and gas projects argue that they shouldn’t have to sacrifice their health for the province’s environmental virtue. [There is no virtue in putting polluting power plants in neighbourhoods -- this is NOT GREEN] But no such demand is being made on them. [Oh, really?] ... By their nature, Nimbies put their own concerns above the greater good. That’s half- understandable when they are fighting, say, a new highway or a garbage dump. But when the target is something as innocuous as a windmill, or as necessary as power from natural gas, you have to shake your head a little." MIRANET article re: Ontario's Green Energy Strategy.
MIRANET comment: WOW. This article is just plain embarrassing, especially at this stage of the conversation. Rather than taking time and space to highlight the way the author undercuts his own arguments ("dodgy" indeed! "half-understandable"? -- who's editing this stuff?) we'll help out by answering the irresistible question posed in the column: "What would you have Ontario do instead?". The author misses the point that while coal is being eliminated, the power generation and transmission infrastructure owned by the citizens of Ontario IS NOT. Change fuels! Per the author's bio, best stick to foreign affairs. Meantime, please view our YouTube video: Why NOT Nanticoke? The Nanticoke Solution.
TRANSCANADA LETTER: Mississauga News letter to the editor, by John Mikkelsen, Development Manager, TransCanada (June 3, 2010): Nanticoke won’t work. Excerpt: "[MIRANET's] coverage of the power plant issue could use some balance. It’s misleading to state that the power facility planned for Oakville could be simply moved to Nanticoke. ... Those charged with running our power system did a thorough assessment of the power supply problem and solutions in the southwest GTA. The best solution is a new natural gas-fired power plant in the southwest GTA corridor. By the way, I’m a resident of south Mississauga." MIRANET comment: Thanks for the dollar figures...most helpful...will write soon.
Toronto Star opinion column, by
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
(May 24, 2010): Ontario will have to reduce natural gas consumption. Excerpt: "Natural gas is also considered the clean fossil fuel. When burned, it releases roughly half the CO2 emissions of coal, zero mercury, and far fewer smog-causing pollutants. Being so plentiful, embracing natural gas for power generation – and essentially displacing coal – is seen as the most effective and quickest way to reduce CO2 emissions in the electricity sector. Still, the party could be short lived in a market like Ontario. Yes, the province is relying on natural gas-fired power generation as part of its coal phase-out strategy, but once all the coal plants are shut down in 2014, then what? At that point, natural gas becomes the dirtiest fuel in the power generation hierarchy and will have a big target on its back. ... But no targets have been set [to reduce natural gas consumption]. It has all been uncoordinated and, for the most part, overshadowed by the government’s obsession with the electricity sector. But if Ontario is to meet its greenhouse-gas emission targets, it will soon have to place a greater effort on reducing natural gas consumption, either through conservation, energy efficiency initiatives, or displacement through renewables such as geothermal, solar thermal and biogas."
Hamilton Spectator article (May 22, 2010): Haldimand wants gas plant: Mayors urge province to change controversial Oakville plan. Excerpt: "The mayors of Mississauga, Oakville and Haldimand County have joined forces to lobby the Liberal government to support a plan to build a natural gas power plant in rural Haldimand instead of a controversial scheme to establish one in Oakville. ... Oakville and Mississauga, and many residents, are opposed to a plan by TransCanada Pipelines to build a $1.2 billion natural gas-fired generating plant near the Ford plant, which is within a three-kilometre radius of 11,000 homes and 16 schools. ... [Haldimand Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it earlier this month hosted [Mississauga Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it and took her on a tour of the [Competitive Power Ventures] CPV's proposed site for its gas plant and the hydro line corridor. Trainer also met May 14 with the clean air subcommittee of MIRANET, Mississauga's city-wide ratepayers group, and took them on a tour." MIRANET comment: A YouTube video about our visit to Haldimand and the reasons to continue generating power from Nanticoke is pending. Click here for the MIRANET article about the Nanticoke option.
Toronto Sun opinion column, by Michael den Tandt (May 14, 2010): Wind revolt won't die: Rural opposition to massive turbine farms in the countryside won't blow over. Excerpt: "Employees of the wind industry and Ontario Liberal politicians are scratching their heads. Why the fuss about wind turbines? ... The Green Energy Act is law, turbines are coming to the countryside and that’s it. Here’s a tip, from the hinterland. This is incorrect. The furor is building, not waning. Premier Dalton McGuinty was already a long shot for a third term. With wind in the mix and barring a radical re-do of the Green Energy Act, he is positioned to lose every rural and small-town seat. ... But now along comes Big Wind, propelled by the vision of former Ontario deputy premier [and former Energy Minister] George Smitherman. The vision is one in which the Ontario landscape, including land directly proximate to the Escarpment, is festooned with massive industrial turbines. Suddenly, preserving our agricultural and geographic heritage is less important. Indeed, such values don’t even seem to figure in the debate. Nor has there yet been a serious effort to expand nuclear — still the only way to produce huge quantities of energy without emitting carbon. An irony about current-day Ontario: We have a government that says it is deeply committed to environmental protection. If a rare species of dung beetle is unearthed in a marsh, chances are no building will be allowed there. But disrupting the ecosystem of thousands of rural people? Not a problem. Disrupt away." MIRANET comment: And then there is the disruption to millions of urban people, who must breathe in the toxic emissions of locally-sited gas-fired power plants which are justified as 'back-up' to the intermittent renewable sources -- at great economic cost to ALL ratepayers (see below). This 'Green Energy Strategy' needs a rethink. Click for the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy.
National Post opinion column, by Tom Adams (May 13, 2010): Power burnout: Still loaded with debt, Ontario’s electricity sector is headed for another meltdown. Excerpt: "Wednesday’s article on this page by Parker Gallant, 'Still stranded after all these years,' shines much-needed light on the finances of Ontario’s power system. With the McGuinty government outdoing the causes of Ontario Hydro’s bankruptcy in 1998 — it is investing heavily again in CANDU nuclear power and signing 20-year power purchase deals at up to 12 times current consumer cost — reviewing the last bankruptcy is timely. ... another factor draining OEFC [Ontario Electricity Financial Corporation] revenues is the government’s repeated use of OEFC to fund policy initiatives. OEFC now funds [Ontario Power Generation] OPG’s coal phase-out costs with 'contingent support' payments. Coal-related payments to OPG are just one portion of the huge growth in the various new charges to Ontario electricity consumers beginning in mid 2008. Premier Dalton McGuinty is now using one of those charges, called the Global Adjustment Charge, to move costly government policy initiatives, including direct Ministry of Energy operations, onto consumer power bills. ... Ontario’s electricity system is essentially moving back to where it was in 1998 — rolling in debt, facing rising costs, and funding electricity projects that are designed to lose money." Click here for the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy.
This Magazine article, by Darcy Higgins (May 13, 2010): When Ontarians conserve power, wind farms will be first to shut down. Excerpt: "Despite its recent investment in wind energy, Ontario will periodically ask wind operators to turn off their turbines, leaving gas and nuclear operating, This Magazine has learned. Conservation efforts and more energy production have led to an occasional surplus of electricity in the province, requiring Ontario to power down some generators at certain times of the year. According to a source within Ontario’s non-renewable generating sector, wind generators will be the first to be shut down during surplus periods due to contracts that favour older natural gas plants. Ontario will soon have 1,200 Megawatts of wind power installed, and significant portions of it would periodically go unused under the scheme. ... The OPA [Ontario Power Authority] plans to add significant capacity throughout the province. Because Ontario’s demand for electricity can range from 12,000 to 27,000 megawatts, the OPA has reasoned that more generation is needed for peak times. Ontario recently signed a deal with Samsung C&T and Korean Electric Power to build and generate 600 megawatts of wind power in the province. Last Thursday, it announced 184 additional contracts for renewable energy projects, including wind and solar. It is also pursuing natural gas power plants including controversial projects in King and Oakville as well as renewable projects throughout the province." MIRANET comment: Oakville and King are being forced to take gas-fired plants as 'back-up' to renewables. Backup? Not so much ... Click here for the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy.
National Post - Financial Post opinion column, by Parker Gallant (May 11, 2010): Ontario’s Power Trip: The 20% hydro grab: Why electricity bills in Canada’s biggest province are set to soar. Excerpt: "Since I began the Ontario Power Trip series, I’ve received many requests from people asking me to tell them how much their electricity bill would go up. My first stab at an answer was to tell people it looked like about 20%. ... Also awaiting OEB [Ontario Energy Board] approval is another application from Toronto Hydro. It said the following: 'In addition, the global economic downturn and other factors such as conservation have significantly eroded demand for power and energy.' As a result, Toronto Hydro 'would be unable to recover its existing revenue requirement given the reduced load it is now experiencing.' So the equation in the public-utility sector is: Demand down, rates up! So why are they spending money to tell us to conserve, if the final result is to get us to pay more?" MIRANET comment: Demand is down, costs are up, yet the Ontario government is still siting an unneeded, costly and polluting gas-fired power plant in the Clarkson-Oakville Airshed! Huh?
National Post - Financial Post opinion column, by Parker Gallant (May 11, 2010): Ontario’s Power Trip: Still stranded after all these years: Stranded debt of Ontario Hydro remains $27.6-billion. Excerpt: "Since its formation, OEFC [Ontario Electricity Financial Corporation] has received the staggering sum of $36.3-billion from Ontario ratepayers. But the organization still owes the OFA [Ontario Finance Authority] $27.6-billion. OEFC’s debt has declined by the princely sum of $2.9- billion in the last 10 years. At that rate it will be 100 years before the old Ontario Hydro stranded debt is paid off." MIRANET comment: This doesn't even include the extra costs electricity ratepayers will incur to pay-out guaranteed 20-year contracts with operators of numerous local gas-fired power plants, and the subsidies to renewable (intermittent) energy supply which all needs back-up. Double trouble! The responsible solution: convert Nanticoke!
National Post opinion column, by John Ivison (May 11, 2010): McGuinty still has 'God's work' to do. Excerpt: "Toward the end of last year, the word around Queen's Park was that
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
might resign his premiership before the next Ontario election in 2011. Support for his Liberal party was bleeding because of his plans to introduce a harmonized sales tax and the eHealth Ontario spending scandal. ... 'Premier Dad' is not ready to retire to his garden; rather he is feeling invigorated and is busy conceiving of new ways in which the provincial government can interject itself into the lives of Ontarians. ... he has favoured using the levers of power at the provincial government's disposal to shape Ontario with broad, sweeping and expensive interventions. ... [he] has also introduced a Green Energy Act that has driven up [the] cost of electricity so that it is now 65% higher than in Quebec and Manitoba. ... 'When I travel and meet U.S. governors, they are very unhappy with our Green Energy Act. We're so far ahead of them. We're positioning ourselves to take advantage of growing American demand for clean power," the Premier responded."
National Post opinion column, by Doug MacKenzie, president of C4CA (May 11, 2010): Gas power plant needs buffer zone. Excerpt: "While cleaner than the coal they replace, gas-fired plants burn fossil fuels and emit thousands of tons of greenhouse gas pollution every day they operate. Further, natural gas power plants are not without risk, as the explosion at one such facility in Middletown, Conn., sadly illustrated two months ago. That accident killed six workers and injured 26, blowing out windows in homes and a hospital three kilometres away. ... Oakville's MPP, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , has proposed a private member's bill [Bill 8] that would require a 1,500-metre buffer zone between natural gas power plants and land zoned for homes, schools or hospitals". Click here for the MIRANET article and comments about Bill 8.
Toronto Sun opinion column, by Lorrie Goldstein (May 9, 2010): Electricity rate hike shocker. Excerpt: "Today, every time another price hike in electricity rates is announced, politicians like [Premier This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it and Energy Minister This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , along with hydro officials, solemnly lecture us about the need to fight climate change. But most of these rate increases have nothing to do with that. ... The only impact on climate change is a brutal and unfair one to consumers. It’s that at some point, which obviously varies from household to household, electricity becomes so expensive, people cut their consumption not for the sake of the environment or because they have a choice, but because they can’t afford to pay for the electricity they need. ... Ontario’s multi-billion-dollar subsidy of wind and solar power — which basically means forcing consumers to pay more than the market price for electricity — is just starting to kick into hydro rates and will have a major upward impact in future. ... But unless the government puts a price on carbon dioxide emissions — thereby raising electricity prices even more — these subsidies make no economic sense over the long term. All that will happen is renewable energy companies will happily gobble up these inflated government subsidies, which last about 20 years, until they run out, then close shop. In order for wind and solar power to become major energy sources, economically viable over the long term, they have to become price competitive with fossil fuels." MIRANET comment: But since all wind and solar in Ontario has to be backed up with parallel natural gas-fired generation plants (with their own 20-year contracts), the price of renewables can NEVER be competitive, and human health will suffer so long as these gas plants are placed in communities. Convert Nanticoke! Click for the MIRANET article about the Nanticoke option. Click for the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy.
Windsor Star opinion column, by Jim Collinson (May 7, 2010): Ontario's energy policy is blowing in the wind. Excerpt: "How has energy generation got to this point without any apparent evidence of the comprehensive examination of options and calculation of future implications? The problem is Ontario's current energy policy, apparently developed to appear to be green in an effort to curry the favour of environmental interest groups -- but without carefully thinking it through. ... Wind energy is expensive and unreliable. Whatever output results from wind generation needs to be matched by an equal amount of energy from another source. ... Consequently, double the capacity of the wind farm is needed to ensure reliable, consistent availability (coal or gas-fired generators, nuclear generators, imports, etc.) ... A review of the Ontario energy policy appears warranted before more new investment takes place on questionable "green" projects. ... Since energy can be transported and energy sources and options vary across the country, a good balance can be achieved for environmental, economic and security purposes. ... Ontario's energy policy and current procedural exceptions to normal project approval need immediate attention -- preferably in a national context." Oakville Beaver article (May 7, 2010): Town [of Oakville] wants to hear where residents want a power plant. Excerpt: "Power plant locations have been a hot topic in Oakville ever since the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) announced a southeast Oakville site was being considered for a 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant back in early 2009. At that time, council passed an interim control bylaw stating gas-fired power plants with a capacity greater than 10-megawatts could not be built in Oakville until a study is completed outlining where in Oakville larger power plants could best be accommodated. TransCanada appealed this bylaw to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), after being awarded a contract to build the Oakville Generating Station on the Ford-owned lands of 1500 Royal Windsor Dr. The OMB allowed the bylaw to stand and the study to proceed. Once complete the study could have a significant impact on the TransCanada project. ... The study has put together three options outlining possible models for determining where power plants can be located in Oakville. ... The first workshop is scheduled for May 18, at [Oakville] Town Hall, 7-9 p.m. Workshops will also take place on May 20 and 31 if required." Click here to view the Oakville report: Land Use Policy study for Power Generation & Cogeneration Facilities (201p). Click here for the Town's Public Consultation Strategy (2p).
Globe and Mail article (May 6, 2010): Ontario utilities told not to bother with requests for rate increase. Excerpt: "The Ontario government has taken the highly unusual step of ordering the province's Crown-owned electricity utilities to cancel their requests for hydro rate increases, amid worries of a consumer backlash over soaring power costs. The government’s 11th-hour intervention in a rate-setting process that is designed to take the politics out of electricity pricing follows revelations that residential customers in Ontario are already facing increases of $300 more a year on average to keep the lights on by the end of 2011. ... The magnitude of the increase Hydro One was seeking – 22 per cent over two years, according to industry sources – left many of its largest customers in shock. ... Energy consultants say several factors account for the $300 annual increase, or 25 per cent, consumers are facing next year, including green-energy investors the government is luring with the promise of generous long-term contracts. The figure does not include the increases sought by Ontario Hydro and OPG." MIRANET comment: (As sent to all Mississauga MPPs, the This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it and This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ) Exactly how, then, are the costs of electricity (sometimes non-)generation to be paid for, and when? And to this, OPA is adding an unneeded gas-fired power plant in Oakville with a 20-year guaranteed contract? Click for the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy.
National Post article (May 6, 2010): Toronto’s power rates to jump by 20%. Excerpt: "Electricity rates are on track to rise more than 20% by the fall amid burgeoning infrastructure costs and a provincial push toward renewable energy, [Anthony Haines] the CEO of Toronto Hydro Corporation says. ... Several factors are linked to the hike, he said, noting Toronto Hydro accounts for a quarter of a consumer’s bill. ... In addition, Mr. Haines said, a series of costs has arisen at the direction of provincial policy, including the move away from coal-fired plants toward renewable power sources and the pending implementation of the harmonized sales tax [HST]. Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty last month awarded contracts for dozens of renewable energy projects throughout the province, forcing higher prices, as wind and solar generation are more expensive than conventional sources. ... The proliferation of renewable power sources, such as wind energy, will bring a new set of challenges, Mr. Haines said. Wind is difficult to predict; one day may bring extreme winds, and the next, dead calm.
Canadian Taxpayers Federation commentary, by
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
, B.C. director (May 5, 2010): B.C.: The corporate welfare challenge. Excerpt: "The release of B.C.’s new Clean Energy Act in April has B.C. competing with Ontario to see whose handouts will 'attract' the most so-called clean and green energy investment in Canada. ... However, the evidence from both Ontario and abroad is clear: green-energy corporate welfare leads to higher energy prices and fewer jobs. Creating a more generous green-energy subsidy scheme than Ontario’s won’t be easy. Since May 2009, the Ontario government has been paying a guaranteed rate to renewable energy companies—one that is higher than what these companies would otherwise receive. ... It means the average family in Ontario will pay an extra $300 per year to heat their home and cook their food. ... Ontario’s commitment to subsidize energy sources has made it the most expensive energy market in Canada—do we really want to be in this race? ... Why might Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty want to force Ontario families to pay more to heat their homes in the winter? The Ontario government is desperate to appear to be doing something about declining employment in manufacturing. Premier McGuinty promises to create more than 50,000 jobs with his new Green Energy Act. Will it work? Probably not." Oakville Beaver article (May 5, 2010): Did Flynn weaken Oakville’s opposition to power plant?. Excerpt: "Does Oakville’s MPP bear some responsibility for the 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant that is now looming over Oakville? The MPP himself, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , says no, but Beaches-East York MPP and NDP Poverty Critic This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it says yes. Prue rose during the second reading of Flynn’s private member’s bill [8] at Queen’s Park on April 22 and said he would be supporting the bill, which proposed a 1,500 metre separation distance between power plants and residential areas, but also said it was important for Oakville residents to know they are only in this situation because of a motion Flynn brought forward on Aug. 30, 2006 [Click here to view the Hansard transcript]. Prue said that motion, which passed, reformed the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) making it so that from that point on proposed energy projects could not be appealed to the OMB. Flynn’s motion, Prue said, destroyed a municipality’s ability to use its zoning authority to situate energy projects of greater size than two megawatts. ... The OMB reforms, Flynn said, brought about by his motion on Aug. 30, 2006 made it so the OMB would treat towns, cities and applicants equally. ... 'For Michael to say that it excludes the towns or the cities from any involvement in the case is absolute rubbish,' said Flynn. 'When you look at the involvement the Town of Oakville has had in this to date, you can see there are ample opportunities for them and those opportunities will continue. The Town has been very, very active in this fight.'" Click to view the MIRANET article about Bill 8. Click to view the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy. MAYORS' LETTER: Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it (Mississauga), Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it (Oakville) and Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it (Haldimand County) sent a joint letter to Ontario Energy and Infrastructure Minister This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it on May 4, 2010, entitled: A win-win-win solution for all Ontarians (click to view). Excerpt: "Minister, we are writing in support of a proposed state-of-the-art natural gas-fired electric generation facility in Haldimand County that will improve air quality, create jobs, and raise the quality of life for millions of Ontarians. ... By contrast, a proposed plan to build a 940 mw fossil fuel-fired electricity generation plant steps from schools, homes, and parks in the Clarkson Airshed makes no sense. Residents and our technical experts have made it clear that constructing and operating the proposed gas-fired generators in the already too-dirty Clarkson Airshed is a health burden too great to bear."
MUST READ: Toronto Star editorial (May 5, 2010): Where’s the power plan?. Excerpt: "Environmental Commissioner This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it raised an important question this week with his report on energy conservation: where is Ontario’s 20-year plan for meeting our electricity needs and what are the targets for renewable power and conservation? The Ontario Power Authority’s website confidently states that the plan will 'identify the conservation, generation and transmission investments needed to ensure reliable and sustainable energy.' But the first draft of the Integrated Power System Plan [IPSP], released in 2007, was sent back to the drawing board in 2008 by then energy minister George Smitherman, who wanted a greater focus on renewable energy and conservation. It has not resurfaced since then. ... the need remains for an overarching plan that ensures Ontario will meet the electricity demands of residents and businesses today and in the future. It is also vital that the plan be publicly debated." Click here for the June 29, 2006 OPA background report on the scope and overview of the IPSP. MIRANET comment: See the ECO report below, and MIRANET's comment as sent to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , Environmental Commissioner of Ontario - Report (May 3, 2010): First Annual Energy Conservation Progress Report, Volume One: Rethinking Energy Conservation in Ontario. This link leads to the ECO website and the key findings, recommendations and full text of the report. Click to view the ECO Press Release: Energy Conservation: The Opportunities in a Large and Unfinished Agenda. Excerpt: "Ontario needs a comprehensive energy conservation strategy developed with public participation, to guide energy conservation activity and measure progress. This is one of the conclusions in the report tabled by This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO), before the Ontario Legislature today. 'The government’s approach to energy conservation appears uncoordinated and improvised, with no clear plan,' warns Miller in the report ... In electricity, the one energy sector where Ontario had begun developing a long-term plan, Miller notes that uncertainty prevails. The development of the [Ontario Power Authority (OPA)'s] Integrated Power System Plan [IPSP] has been suspended, and the role that it will play in guiding electricity conservation action is not known. In the absence of an approved Plan, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure has set electricity conservation policy on an ad hoc basis, with little opportunity for public input." MIRANET comment: (As e-mailed to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ) And in the absence of an approved Plan, the Ontario government (through the OPA) continues its ad hoc siting of polluting natural gas-fired power plants in existing neighbourhoods at great environmental (health) and economic cost. Click for the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy. Ancaster News opinion column, by Jim Knisley (April 29, 2010): Loss of coal plants is a loss of jobs. Excerpt: "Ontario is ahead of the federal timetable [15-20 years] and has said it will stop burning coal at its four plants by 2014. While that might seem to be the absolute end for Nanticoke, there is the possibility that coal could be replaced with biomass. Tests using biomass are being carried out and if suitable feedstock and a variety of commercial and technical issues are worked out the plant could have a future. There is also a very slim possibility that a gas-fired power plant proposed for Oakville could find a home near Nanticoke. The opposition to locating the large plant in Oakville is intense. The municipal government is opposed, as are several well-organized groups of residents. To date, the provincial government and the power authority have continued to push ahead, but that could change." Click for the MIRANET article about Nanticoke. North Oakville Today article (April 29, 2010): Power plant fight lost in 2006, New Democrat MPP claims. Excerpt: "The day in question was August 30, 2006 during a General Government Committee meeting. 'That was motion #94 dealing with section 23 of the Municipal Act,” explained [MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , 'which took away every single right that every single citizen and every single municipality in this province had, to question whether or not a plant like this was sited in their municipality.' In a transcript provided by Prue’s office, the Oakville Liberal [MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ] was recorded as voting aye for this amendment. ' ... the reality is that today this is all happening to you [in Oakville] because this government determined on that date in 2006 that you would never again have an opportunity through your elected officials municipally or your right as citizens to go before the OMB to ever again challenge an abomination like this,' he [MPP Prue] said." Click here to view the HANSARD transcript of the Committee meeting cited. Globe and Mail opinion column, by Adam Radwanski (April 29, 2010): Why Kevin Flynn can’t stop the Oakville gas plant. Excerpt: "But for all his efforts, it’s likely that Mr. [Oakville MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it will run into a brick wall. Because it’s hard to imagine how Mr. McGuinty could afford for the plant not to be built. To effectively overrule the Ontario Power Authority – which considered several locations in the southwestern part of the Greater Toronto Area, and settled on this one – would set a precedent that would create a whole new set of problems for Mr. McGuinty. In fact, it would pose major problems for a very large chunk of his policy agenda." MIRANET comment: This is what it's all about -- a flawed energy strategy that is causing discord and suffering in communities across Ontario. We need to maintain Ontario's traditional strengths in remote generation and transmission. Convert Nanticoke! Click for the MIRANET article about Ontario's Green Energy Strategy. Oakville Beaver article (April 28, 2010): Noisy days may be ahead for Oakville power plant. Excerpt: "Those living near the proposed site of the 900-megawatt, gas-fired power plant may have to endure a few noisy days if and when the plant is built."
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
, MPP and Leader, Official Opposition - CNW Press Release (April 27, 2010): Tim Hudak Calls For Municipalities to Have a Say on Industrial Wind Farms. Excerpt: "Tim Hudak and the Ontario PC Caucus will introduce a motion in the Ontario Legislature tomorrow calling on the McGuinty Government [to] restore planning authority to Ontario municipalities so that no industrial wind farm can be imposed on a community that does not want one. Dalton McGuinty's so-called 'Green Energy Act' allows the Toronto based energy bureaucrats at the Ontario Power Authority to arbitrarily place industrial wind farms anywhere in Ontario regardless of the views of the democratically elected local governments. Municipalities across Ontario have expressed economic and environmental concerns about the wind farms that are being forced upon them under Dalton McGuinty's so-called 'Green Energy Act'." MIRANET comment 1: (E-mailed to
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
) This is why natural gas-fired power plants are also being placed in communities against the will of the municipalities and the citizens. Let's get back local control over all such decisions. Mississauga News article (April 26, 2010): Power plant bill one step closer. Excerpt: "'We share concerns about the addition of a new emitter and the cumulative impact of emissions on health,' said [Mississauga South MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it in a statement following the debate. 'As such, I propose that the scope of the exemptions listed in section 2 of Bill 8 be enhanced.'" Click to view the MIRANET article about Bill 8.
Globe and Mail opinion column, by Adam Radwanski (April 26, 2010): Rising energy bills are Ontario Liberals’ ‘sleeper issue’. Excerpt: "And because of the risky way they’ve handled the file, Dalton McGuinty’s Liberals could be especially vulnerable. No question, energy prices had to go up. That’s the cost of upgrading aging infrastructure that the province long neglected. And in some instances, declining commercial usage following the economic downturn has pushed the cost of those upgrades disproportionately onto individual consumers. Adding to those costs is the transition away from coal toward cleaner forms of power such as natural gas – another direction most governments would be going in, albeit perhaps at a slightly slower pace. But on top of those inevitabilities, the Liberals have made a series of decisions that could be seen as rubbing Ontarians’ noses in their higher bills. For starters, there’s the new harmonized sales tax [HST], which will start being collected in July. ... there’s the appearance of bloated bureaucracy, courtesy of the Ontario Power Authority. ... there’s a conservation strategy that remains very much a work in progress. ... Finally, most broadly and perhaps most significantly, there’s the Liberals’ green energy strategy. ... The Tories, for now, are mostly holding fire on green energy – criticizing specifics, notably the province’s $7-billion deal with the Samsung Group, but not the basic principles." MIRANET comment: (
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
) Let's deal with the basic principles, already, before it's too late -- in a nutshell: Duplicated, de-centralized and subsidized electricity generation infrastructure systems are being built – one ‘green’ (wind, solar) – and one NOT (numerous natural gas-fired power plants in communities). A 'Ring of Fire' of 7 gas-fired power plants will concentrate emissions within the regional SWGTA air pool at great environmental cost to millions of people who on top of it will have to pay increased rates to subsidize this strategy -- even while energy demand is dropping, the power producers will still receive an extortionate rate of return. The grid has to be upgraded anyway: let's get back to cheaper and safer remote generation to back-up renewables. Convert Nanticoke! Globe and Mail article (April 25, 2010): Ottawa tells energy firms to start powering down coal-fired plants. Excerpt: "Environment Minister Jim Prentice has told Canada’s major electricity producers that they’ll have to gradually retire their coal-fired plants and replace them with cleaner sources of power – a plan that would be a boon to natural gas producers. ... Canada has 21 operating coal plants – with Ontario planning to close its four by 2014; while the U.S. has some 650 coal-burning plants that provide more than half the country’s electricity. ... Rick Smith, president of Environmental Defence, said the government’s efforts to reduce emissions in the power sector – which account for 17 per cent of emissions – will be overwhelmed by growing CO2 emissions as oil companies boost production from the oil sands." Toronto Star opinion column, by This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , Vice-President, Power Generation Development, TransCanada Energy Ltd. (April 25, 2010): Why new natural gas power plants are a good fit for the GTA. MIRANET RESPONSE: Click to view the MIRANET response to this column, as forwarded to the Toronto Star, TransCanada, Premier Dalton McGuinty, the Ontario Power Authority and other parties to this matter. Excerpt: "We are pleased that TransCanada acknowledges that there is a debate regarding Ontario’s energy strategy, particularly in the GTA where so many natural gas power plants are being built in populated communities. ... As with their video, we don’t believe TransCanada’s column is directed at the citizens, but rather, at the Ontario government, in an effort to shore up a flawed energy strategy that would see TransCanada receive a 9% guaranteed annual return on $1.2B (after tax) over 20 years, regardless of how little power is produced by the proposed Oakville Generating Station." Toronto Star opinion column, by Robert Benzie, Queen’s Park Bureau Chief (April 23, 2010): Analysis: Dalton McGuinty’s sex-ed surrender motivated by politics. Excerpt: "There are also internal skirmishes for the premier – on Thursday, 15 Liberal MPPs joined Progressive Conservatives and New Democrats to pass second reading of legislation by maverick Grit This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it to stop a gas-fired power plant in his Oakville riding. Flynn’s private member’s bill is unlikely to pass third reading—McGuinty has railed against NIMBY-ism and emphasized the need for new generation in Oakville—but the 28-1 vote shows Liberal MPPs aren’t afraid to assert their independence. With caucus dissent over the electricity plant and lingering fears about the political cost of the HST, the last thing McGuinty needed was socially conservative Ontarians hounding Liberal MPPs. Seventeen months before the next election, the premier wants to start putting out fires, not stoking them." Oakville Beaver article (April 23, 2010): Flynn's power plant bill sails through second reading. Excerpt: "A private member's bill that could stop a 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant from being built on the Ford-owned lands of 1500 Royal Windsor Dr., took another step towards becoming law, Thursday, surviving its second reading at Queen's Park." BILL 8: An Act to establish separation distances for natural gas power plants went to Second Reading and debate in the Legislature on April 22, 2010 and passed 28-1. This private member's bill, sponsored by Oakville MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , is now referred to the Committee on General Government. Click for the MIRANET article and comments about Bill 8. Toronto Star article (April 22, 2010): Ontario green tax illegal, study says. Except: "A $53.7 million “fee” imposed on electricity users to support green energy programs is not just expensive, it’s illegal, says a study prepared for the C.D. Howe Institute. That’s because the fee is really a tax, says the study. And taxes must be approved by the Legislature. ... Energy minister This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it rejected the analysis, saying the Green Energy Act gives the governments authority for the province to create conservation programs and recover the costs through hydro rates." Oakville Beaver opinion column, by This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , Oakville MP (April 22, 2010): The power of history. Excerpt: "The proposed power plant is the biggest issue in Oakville. ... I believe it is the biggest issue in Oakville’s history. ... The Ontario government reports the air shed is already 'taxed.' Translation: the air is already poisonous for many people. ... Dalton McGuinty promised to close, by 2007, the four remaining Ontario coal-fired plants not already ordered closed. They are all still smoking away. So Oakvillians’ health must be sacrificed now in an attempt to keep an eight-year-old election promise? This plant should be in Nanticoke where it is wanted and would be away from homes and schools. ... To help convince Premier McGuinty to reverse this unhealthy decision, e-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it " PollutionWatch news release (April 21, 2010): Great Lakes Still Under Siege from Toxic Pollution. Excerpt: Canadian companies in the Great Lakes basin reported releasing more cancer-causing pollutants to the air than companies in the United States, according to a report released today by Great Lakes-area environmental groups from both sides of the border. Per facility, Canadian facilities emitted to the air, on average, almost three times more known cancer-causing pollutants. The comparison is based on a matched dataset of 2007 data provided to the Canadian National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) and the US Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), and is outlined in:
PollutionWatch is a collaborative project by: Environmental Defence and the Canadian Environmental Law Association (CLEA).
MUST READ: National Post - Financial Post opinion column, by Parker Gallant (April 20, 2010): There's no place like Ontario. Excerpt: "Last week, in this series on Ontario's electricity market, I outlined the growing dysfunction of the province's major government-owned operating companies: Ontario Power Generation, Hydro One and the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO). They deliver less and less electricity at ever higher costs and prices. Today we look at the main direct regulatory vehicles that control the overall system: The Ontario Power Authority, the Ontario Energy Board and Ontario Electricity Financial Corp. ... The OPA -- the government's vehicle for carrying out directives -- is charged with pushing through the provisions of the Green Energy Act and fulfilling government dictates. ... If the Samsung wind farm produces at the "ideal" 29 % capacity level, the cost to ratepayers will be $1.1-million per day or $406-million for each year the farm operates. Assuming the contract is 20 years the subsidy committed to by the province is in excess of $8-billion. Wind and solar power are somewhat unreliable. ... The above Samsung price guarantee doesn't include backup costs." MIRANET comment: 'Backup costs' include creating a parallel system of natural gas-fired power plants in neighbourhoods and paying a high, guaranteed rate of return to the operators, even when the plants don't run.
Oakville Beaver article (April 16, 2010): Air Quality Task Force forming strategy to reduce air pollution. Excerpt: "With its deadline fast approaching, a member of the Southwest GTA Air Quality Task Force says the group is making progress on an action plan that, if successful, will reduce air pollution throughout the area. This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , the Town of Oakville’s environmental policy director and a member of the task force’s Community Advisory Committee, announced Tuesday the committee has met once a month since January and discussed a wide range of options that could be put in place to reduce industrial, vehicular and residential emissions. ... Task Force Chair This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it assembled the Community Advisory Committee in the hope its unique perspectives and various expertise would be useful in putting together a plan complete with emissions reductions targets and timelines and strategies for reaching those targets." Click here for the MIRANET article about the Task Force. Mississauga News article (April 15, 2010): City may be targeted for power plant: Mayor. Excerpt: "Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it is concerned TransCanada may turn its sights on south Mississauga to locate its 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant if the corporation is stymied in its bid to put the facility in Oakville. ... Haldimand Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it appeared at Council to promote the massive Nanticoke coal-fired power station in her community, which is set to shut down in 2014, as the ideal site to locate the unwanted gas-fired plant proposed for Oakville."
MUST READ: National Post - Financial Post opinion column, by Parker Gallant (April 14, 2010): Ontario's power trip: Priced out of the market. Excerpt: "I was simply curious as to why my electricity bill in Ontario went up when my consumption went down. What I found as I researched is a bewildering story of a province whose electrical sector is in trouble. Ontario is a high-price energy province and, under current policy, it is poised for a further escalation in prices. In short, Ontario is pricing itself out of the market and will not have the ability to attract any manufacturers or service sector companies that require significant energy in their daily processing. ... The OPA functions as the official executor of government policy, and was recently given new powers under the province's Green Energy Act. The act removed the ability of any remonstration from municipal, civic or public communities in the province. Via government directive from the McGuinty cabinet, the OPA dictates the course for how electricity is to be generated and distributed throughout the Province of Ontario for the next 20-plus years." MIRANET DEPUTATION: The MIRANET Clean Air Subcommittee made a Deputation (click to view) before Mississauga City Council on April 14, 2010 regarding the power plant issue and MIRANET's participation on the provincial Air Quality Task Force Community Advisory Committee (CAC). Excerpt: "We have posted countless items to our website in an attempt to categorize and document the Hydra monster that the power plant battle has become over the past 18 months. In addition to ‘health’, this Hydra has heads variously labeled ‘environment’, ‘safety’, ‘flawed process’, ‘lack of need’ and ‘economics’. This latter issue is now picking up steam as hydro ratepayers begin to catch on to the bottom line." Oakville Beaver article (April 14, 2010): Halton Hills power plant demo occurs without incident. Excerpt: "TransCanada’s 683-megawatt gas-fired power plant in Halton Hills recently completed the same operation, without incident, that led to an explosion at a power plant in Middletown, Connecticut. The energy giant invited local media to the power plant during the cleaning of its natural gas piping, in late March, to explain the difference between the process TransCanada uses when it constructs a plant and process that is believed to have been used at the Middletown plant during its construction. ... TransCanada acknowledges that since 2007 there have been five 'incidents' on TransCanada’s pipeline system." Toronto Star opinion column, by Tyler Hamilton (April 12, 2010): Governments losing focus on energy conservation. Excerpt: "To help buffer the anticipated bill increases, Ontario is in large part relying on programs that support energy conservation, including assistance to low- and fixed-income consumers who will be hit hardest by rising energy costs. After all, the Green Energy and Green Economy Act passed last year isn't just about renewable energy. It's supposed to equally encourage conservation as a way to 'help Ontarians manage their electricity costs,' according to the energy ministry's website. On that front, however, we have less reason to cheer. Sure, the province is helping us haul away old refrigerators and install compact fluorescent light bulbs, but beyond that the effort has been weak. We still don't have a meaningful program to help those in most need cope with higher energy prices, new fees and an additional 8 per cent tax coming in July. It seems the energy ministry, led by minister This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , is so focused on promoting renewable power that it's treating energy conservation as an afterthought."
Toronto Star editorial (April 11, 2010): Green energy, at a price. Excerpt: "The provincial government is championing green energy, with contracts awarded last week for dozens of new wind, solar and other renewable energy projects across the province. 'Ontario has a vision for green energy,' said Premier Dalton McGuinty. 'We will be a North American leader.' But the government's critics see a downside: higher prices. ... when combined with other factors driving up the cost of electricity – including the switch to time-of-use billing, the introduction of the harmonized sales tax and the funding of conservation programs – the impact on the average household will be much higher. One estimate puts it at more than $300 a year added to electricity bills, which would make Ontario the most expensive jurisdiction in Canada (along with Prince Edward Island) and put us above the national average in the United States. ... higher prices could become problematic if they make our industry uncompetitive." MIRANET comment: There is also an environmental price for millions of citizens living near the many costly natural gas-fired plants being built as 'back-up' to costly renewables. Clean Break blog, by Tyler Hamilton (April 11, 2010): Wente continues to mislead, misinform Canadian public. Excerpt: "This brings me to Globe and Mail columnist Margaret Wente, a talented, award-winning writer who regularly crosses into the realm of fiction when talking about climate change and green energy. She’s a generalist — knows squat, really, about climate change science and the economics or technology around green energy technologies — but she continues to put herself out there as an authority on such issues. As a result, she’s misleading a Canadian public that’s seeking constructive (and truthful) guidance on the tough choices that lie ahead. ... Let’s deconstruct this latest column." [See the Wente column, below] MUST READ: Globe and Mail opinion column, by Margaret Wente (April 10, 2010): Welcome to the wacky world of green power. Excerpt: "Welcome to the wacky world of green power, where misguided governments have sparked a massive corporate feeding frenzy (at taxpayers’ expense) to achieve little or nothing of any social benefit. This week, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty announced $8-billion more in green investments, on top of the $7-billion he announced a short while ago. ... The heart of their strategy is to pay massive subsidies to wind, solar and other renewable energy producers – many of them large multinational corporations – for the next 20 years. ... Renewables simply can’t produce the large volumes of reliable energy that our economy needs. 'These energy sources are so intermittent and unreliable that you have to have backup power at all times,' says Prof. [Michael] Trebilcock. For every wind farm we build, we’ll have to have a coal or gas-fired power station waiting in the wings to take over when it’s 20 below. 'I think we’ll get next to nothing on carbon dioxide abatement,' he says. ... But what about green jobs? The McGuinty government confidently predicts that its green scheme will create 50,000 of them. Don’t believe it. Some will be temporary construction jobs. Some other jobs will disappear because higher electricity costs will make Ontario less competitive. ... None of this has deterred Mr. McGuinty, who campaigned on the promise of shutting down Ontario’s coal-fired generating plants. Many in his own party now wonder how wise this was. His Green Energy Plan was rammed through by tough guy George Smitherman, who decamped to run for mayor of Toronto long before any chickens come home to roost. ... Does this mean there’s nothing we can do to cut down on fossil fuel emissions? Not at all. Ontario has an abundant supply of clean energy that hasn’t yet been tapped – hydro. 'There’s enough northern Canadian hydro power to satisfy Ontario’s needs for decades,' says Prof. Trebilcock."
Globe and Maill article (April 9, 2010): Ontario green power plan sparks cost concerns. Excerpt: "At least part of the price pressure is the result of the McGuinty government's determination to claim North American leadership in clean energy by closing coal-fired plants and offering premium prices for wind, solar and small hydro developments. ... By relying more on renewables and natural gas, Ontario is confident it can close its coal-fired plants, which just a few years ago produced 20 per cent of the province's electricity needs with low-cost power. Critics such as former provincial power executive Jan Carr say the government is recklessly pursuing politically popular, environmentally friendly policies that will undermine the power system's reliability and affordability. 'The recent rush to ‘green' Ontario's electricity system has produced a largely ad hoc approach to the selection and investment in power generation technologies that will unnecessarily increase the cost of electricity with far-reaching economic and social effects,' Dr. Carr wrote in this month's edition of the Journal of Policy Engagement [see below]." MIRANET comment: On top of it all, the natural gas plants are being placed near people -- what is 'environmentally-friendly' about that? MUST READ: Journal of Policy Engagement article, by Jan Carr (v. 2, no. 2, April 2010): A rational framework for energy policy. Excerpt: "The recent rush to 'green' Ontario’s electricity system has produced a largely ad hoc approach to the selection and investment in power generation technologies that will unnecessarily increase the cost of electricity with far-reaching economic and social effects. ... The only remaining realistic option for keeping new electricity supply in moment-by-moment balance with customer requirements is natural-gas-fired generation." Jan Carr was the CEO of the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) from the time of its founding in January 2005 until September 2008.
Oakville Beaver article (April 9, 2010): Pickering train derailment raises another concern over power plant location. Excerpt: "Oakville politicians are pointing to the recent derailment of a freight train in Pickering as yet another example of why the Province and even the federal government should take a second look at where the Oakville Generating Station is being placed." Envirogy blog (April 9, 2010): Our unstable footing. Excerpt: "The Ontario government awarded just over $8-billion in renewable energy projects to dozens of companies ... 184 contracts make up the $8 billion investment and when completed, the solar, wind, water and bio-fuel projects will power 600,000 homes, generating more than 2,500 megawatts of electricity, the provincial government said. What they failed to mention - as they always do - is that the majority of these projects will produce intermittent energy and will need to be backed up with dirty fossil fuels, the provinces’ poison of choice, Natural Gas. There are currently 10 natural gas fired plants in Ontario and another 4 in the planning/construction stages. Dalton McGunity is facing an uphill battle with a proposed plant in Oakville that brought out 500 protesters to Queens park last week. The 900-megawatt, gas-fired power station, is to be built next to the town’s Ford car plant and a mere 350 metres from the closest homes. As BurningDinosaur [see below] points out phasing out 4 coal-power generating plants and replacing them with 14 natural gas plants does not reduce our Co2 emissions but actually increases them. So the government has tied the Canadian taxpayer/ratepayer to a $15 billion investment in ‘green’ energy spread out over 20 years." MUST READ: BurningDinosaur website entry (May 21, 2008): Natural gas plants not an answer to phasing out of coal-fired plants. Excerpt: "What is the collective impact of all this fossil fuel burning in Ontario? Is building outdated dinosaurs the least cost option? Will it produce energy whose rates won’t leave anyone behind in freezing or sweltering darkness due to inability to pay heating/cooling or electricity bills. Is it the most environmentally friendly? Is it the most energy secure? Have we looked at installing integrated renewable energy systems and then decided that natural gas burning for energy is environmentally, economically, environmentally and security-wise better option?" Ontario Power Authority (OPA), Press Release (April 8, 2010): Ontario Announces 184 Large-Scale Renewable Energy Projects. Excerpt: "More Ontario homes and businesses will soon be powered by green energy with the awarding of contract offers for almost 2,500 megawatts of renewable energy announced today by Ontario’s Minister of Energy and Infrastructure, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . These projects, approved under the province’s landmark Feed-in Tariff (FIT), are part of the largest green energy investment of its kind in Canadian history. ... Seventy-six of the approved projects are ground-mounted solar photovoltaic, 47 are on-shore wind and 46 are waterpower projects. There are also seven biogas, two biomass, four landfill gas, one roof top solar and one off-shore wind projects. Significantly expanding the amount of renewable generation is a key part of the provincial government’s strategy to address climate change by eliminating dirty coal-fired generation by the end of 2014." MIRANET comment: Significantly missing is any mention of all the new natural gas-fired power plants (and their fossil-fuel emissions) which are being placed in neighbourhoods to support the intermittent renewables -- this is 'GREEN'? Windsor Star opinion column (April 7, 2010): The battle on the lakes. Excerpt: "I have no quibbles with 'being green' and being energy efficient. I also have no quibbles with democracy in assuring the rights of individuals. Challenging is juxtaposing green imperatives with democracy. ... Ontario's autocratic Green Energy Act, in addition to being a nightmare for citizens, is a horror story for municipalities. Municipal planning died in Schedule K of the act, which exempts developers from zoning bylaws and official plans. A major consulting firm advises on its website: 'New planning act exemptions also help investors build renewable energy generation facilities and engage in other renewable energy projects despite municipal zoning bylaws that may otherwise prohibit development. This will overcome potential municipal obstacles' ... Of course, the energy act creates lucrative rates of return for investors through long-term contracts to provide green energy to Ontario's electrical grid. Ontario consumers are required to subsidize rates should developers suffer financial loss. One section of the act provides that 'consumers are required to contribute toward the amount of any compensation arising from a distributor's lost revenue arising from a rate reduction.' ... What is disturbing about Ontario's Green Energy Act is not its basic notion. Rather, it is the casual manner in which democracy has been sidelined by delegated authority." Toronto Star letter to the editor, by This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it (April 7, 2010): Gas plant risks are unacceptable. Re: Is Oakville's gas power plant too close to its neighbours? (Comment, April 5). Excerpt: "Doug MacKenzie's piece should be a wake-up call for all of us. Having a provincial agency, the Ontario Power Authority, responsible for ensuring power needs are met but with no regard for citizens' health and safety, is not only absurd but totally irresponsible. And this makes utter nonsense of all the claims we hear from Queen's Park about green power in Ontario. Surely Premier Dalton McGuinty gets this. All Ontarians need to call him to account and fix the nonsense before we have a community disaster (remember the Mississauga derailment in 1979?) and more chronic respiratory illness – not to mention lives lost – thanks to unbreathable air. Putting gas-fired power plants near the people anywhere is preposterous and perverse. Stop this folly now: the risks are simply unacceptable." Alan Willis is President of the Hillcrest Ratepayers' Association, a MIRANET member. MUST READ: Toronto Star article (April 6, 2010): Rush to renewables could increase electricity costs. Excerpt: "The rush to plug green energy sources into Ontario's electricity system has produced an ad hoc approach to choosing generating systems 'that will unnecessarily increase the cost of electricity,' says the former head of the province's power planning agency. Jan Carr was chief executive of the Ontario Power Authority [OPA] from its inception in 2005 until September 2008. In an article in this month's Journal of Policy Engagement [see below], Carr questions whether the province's push for green technology such as wind turbines will really produce cleaner energy at a cost that makes sense. ... 'The only remaining realistic option for keeping new electricity supply in moment-by-moment balance with customer requirements is natural-gas-fired generation,' Carr writes. In other words, more wind power means more gas-fired generators." MUST READ: Journal of Policy Engagement article, by Jan Carr (v. 2, no. 2, April 2010): A rational framework for energy policy. Excerpt: "The recent rush to 'green' Ontario’s electricity system has produced a largely ad hoc approach to the selection and investment in power generation technologies that will unnecessarily increase the cost of electricity with far-reaching economic and social effects. ... The only remaining realistic option for keeping new electricity supply in moment-by-moment balance with customer requirements is natural-gas-fired generation." Jan Carr was the CEO of the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) from the time of its founding in January 2005 until September 2008. Toronto Star opinion column, by Doug MacKenzie, president of C4CA (April 5, 2010): Why is Oakville's new power plant so close to residents? Excerpt: "Beyond fears in the community about safety, Mississauga and Oakville residents raise concerns about the health impact emissions will have on those living in an airshed that has already been deemed excessively polluted by federal and provincial environment studies. ... And this gas plant, while cleaner than coal, is still a fossil fuel burning plant. It will emit several thousand tonnes of sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds and 2.5-micron particulate matter every year. ... As we race to embrace green energy, everyone agrees that phasing out coal is good for our health and our planet. The problem is that the Ontario Power Authority, the agency responsible for ensuring future power needs are met, does not count health or safety among its priorities." MIRANET comment: The logical solution is to convert the Nanticoke plant. Click for the MIRANET article. Toronto Star opinion column, by Jim Coyle (April 2, 2010): MPP Kevin Flynn takes on Oakville gas plant. Excerpt: "Opponents of the project, which would be one of the biggest in Canada and is slated to open in 2014, say there are 16 schools and 11,000 homes in a three-kilometre radius of the location. ... The trouble is that Premier Dalton McGuinty has recently come to view NIMBYism as a condition worse than the plague. 'I know this is a difficult issue for the people in Oakville,' he told reporters this week. '(But) that’s a community and the surrounding area which is in need of new generation. We’ve decided, working with our power partners, that we need to put new generation in that particular community and we’ve gone with a gas-fired plant. It’s the latest technology and the people of Oakville are entitled to continue to express their concerns.' Which, in leader-speak, is pretty much the brush-off." MIRANET comment: This is a 'difficult issue' for the people in Mississauga as well. We share the Clarkson-Oakville Airshed, which is currently the focus of the provincial Air Quality Task Force.
Town of Oakville, News Release (March 31, 2010): Mayor concerned about train derailments next to proposed power plant. Excerpt: "In light of the derailment of a CN train in Pickering yesterday, Mayor Burton renewed his call for further assessment of the possibility of accidents resulting from the proposed TransCanada power plant being constructed seven metres from a major rail corridor used by CN and GO Transit. 'Thank goodness no one was hurt in the derailment yesterday, but I couldn't help but think, What if there was a major gas-fired power plant right beside that track?' Mayor Burton said. 'I'm just not convinced all the possible scenarios have been thoroughly explored with regards to the safety of locating the proposed plant so close to a major rail corridor - not only because of the possibility of derailments for unforeseen reasons, but because of the potential for the plume from the plant to cause rails to become slippery from condensation or ice.'" Town of Oakville, News Release (March 30, 2010): Town to defend its interim control by-law against TransCanada court actions. Excerpt: "The town will defend its interim control by-law against TransCanada Energy's latest court action, which seeks an order from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice enabling TransCanada to move forward with its plans to build a 900 megawatt power plant at 1500 Royal Windsor Drive, despite the by-law's prohibitions. ... TransCanada's application will be heard on June 24. In addition, TransCanada is appealing its site plan, minor variance and severance applications regarding the proposed power plant to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). A date for the hearing of these appeals has not yet been set. ... Another application from TransCanada seeking leave to appeal the decision made by the OMB last December to uphold the town's interim control by-law is also before the courts." Oakville Beaver article (March 30, 2010): Interim bylaw extension prompts legal action by TransCanada. Excerpt: "Fresh legal action from TransCanada failed to keep Town councillors from voting to extend an interim control bylaw, which is threatening to hold up construction of the 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant proposed for the Ford-owned lands of 1500 Royal Windsor Dr." Town of Oakville, News Release (March 30, 2010): Town's interim control by-law extended to complete land use policy study on power generation facilities. Excerpt: "Oakville Council approved the extension of the town's interim control by-law prohibiting power generation facilities with a generating capacity greater than or equal to 10 megawatts from being built in Oakville. This extension until March 30, 2011 allows the Land Use Policy for Power Generation and Cogeneration Facilities study that Council received last night, to be considered by the public before staff brings official plan and zoning by-law amendments to Council in the fall. ... An open house will be held on April 28 from 2 to 9 p.m. and facilitated workshops are scheduled for May 18, 20 and 31 from 7 to 9 p.m. The town will provide detailed information about these meetings in the near future." ICBL EXTENDED: Per Town of Oakville, Planning and Development Council Meeting (March 29, 2010): Agenda Item 6. Excerpt: "Recommendation 2. That By-law 2010-065, [click to view] a by-law to extend Interim Control By-law 2009‑065 respecting the location of power generating facilities in Oakville be passed." The ICBL was extended to March 29, 2011. Oakville Beaver opinion column, by Oakville Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it (March 26, 2010): Mayor explains disappointment with OPA choice. Excerpt: "Why is the OPA issuing contracts under a power supply plan that has not been approved by the Ontario Energy Board? Why is the OPA building generation, the need for which they can’t show as demand continues to lag supply severely, with the cost going on everyone’s electricity bills? Who besides the OPA chair’s construction company benefits?" NOTE: Also published as Mayor's Press Release (April 6, 2010): Mayor Burton explains disappointment with OPA decision.
Oakville Beaver article (March 26, 2010): Prime Minister passes the torch on mayor’s request. Excerpt: "Prime Minister Stephen Harper has declined an invitation [click to view the letter from the PM's office: Feb. 26, 2010], put forward by Oakville Mayor
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
, to meet and discuss the mayor’s concerns regarding the proposed 900-megawatt gas-fired TransCanada power plant’s close proximity to rail lines." Oakville Beaver article (March 24, 2010): Why was TransCanada site chosen?. Excerpt: "The Ontario Power Authority (OPA) has rejected Oakville MPP
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
’s request for more information about why Oakville was chosen as the site for a 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant. Last November, Flynn made the request, under the Freedom of Information Act, for a total of 24 different documents and pieces of information. On Friday, Flynn announced that all 24 requests have been turned down by the OPA. ... 'We tried to very specifically ask for all the information that would allow the OPA to explain to the people of Oakville how on earth they picked [the Oakville] site ... over some of the other sites that were available [meaning the three sites in Clarkson],' said Flynn. 'I don’t think any one of those sites is suitable, but if I had to rank them, Oakville is clearly the least suitable of the four sites.' ... Questions were also asked about the plant’s environmental impact and if any of the other sites were better suited to absorbing it." Oakville Beaver article (March 24, 2010): Flynn wants minimum 1,500 metres between homes and power plants. Excerpt: "Oakville MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it has introduced a private member’s bill that, if passed, will make it impossible for TransCanada to build a 900- megawatt gas-fired power plant on the Ford-owned lands of 1500 Royal Windsor Dr." Simcoe Reformer article (March 24, 2010): [Nanticoke] Shutdown to begin this fall. Excerpt: "The first phase of the shutdown of the Nanticoke coal-fired generating station will take place in October when two of the plant's units are turned off permanently. About 100 of the station's 600 jobs will be lost as a result. ... Eventually, all eight units will be taken off line as the Ontario government follows through on its promise to rid the province of all coal-fired plants by the end of 2014. ... Nanticoke, however, could still survive if it can be switched over to another cleaner-burning fuel. OPG has experimented with biomass at the station and will continue to look at that option ... Municipal officials in both Haldimand and Norfolk counties have expressed fears about seeing Nanticoke close, given it is one of the largest employers in an area that has already been hard-hit by job losses during the economic downturn. ... Haldimand Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it said she has recruited Mississauga Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it to lobby the province to keep some type of electrical generation at Nanticoke. 'McCallion is promoting the industrial park for us,' Trainer said. 'They don't want energy development in their area.' Trainer said she has gone to Mississauga to talk to city officials about the issue. The end of coal in Ontario has crept up quickly as new types of generation, especially natural gas plants, come on line at the same time as demand for electricity plummets due to the recession." Click here to view Mayor Trainer's speaking notes at the Mississauga Rally against the Power Plant in the Clarkson-Oakville Airshed: June 24, 2009. Click here for a SUMMARY of the Rally, Speakers' remarks and PICTURES. Oakville MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it - Press Release (March 22, 2010): Flynn introduces Private Members Bill on natural gas plant separation distances. Excerpt: "'I have proposed legislation that would place an emphasis on safety when locations are selected for these facilities.' Ontario does not have legislation that mandates how far natural gas power plants must be from residential communities. ... There are considerable health concerns with the emissions from natural gas power plants and safety concerns made more evident following the recent tragedy in Middletown, Connecticut, when an explosion occurred at a natural gas power plant under construction killing five workers." MIRANET comment: The Bill does not address the issue of emissions. BILL 8: Oakville MPP
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
- Private Member's Bill 8, First Reading (March 22, 2010): An Act to establish separation distances for natural gas power plants. Explantory Note: "The Bill enacts the Separation Distances for Natural Gas Power Plants Act, 2010 which prohibits the construction, installation or expansion of a natural gas power plant unless the plant is at least 1,500 metres from any land zoned for residential use or any land on which an educational facility, day nursery or health care facility is located. The Bill provides exceptions for cogeneration power plants and for persons who have obtained all necessary approvals to construct, install or expand a natural gas power plant before the Act comes into force." Click for Kevin Flynn's Press Release: March 22, 2010. Biography: L. David Pengelly, M.Sc., Ph.D., P.Eng. – Hamilton, Ontario. Dr. Pengelly is currently Associate Clinical Professor, Department of Medicine, a member of the McMaster Institute of Environment and Health, and Professor Emeritus, Department of Engineering Physics at McMaster University in Hamilton. That air pollution is an important issue within the Clarkson-Oakville Airshed is recognized by the Ontario government, which created the provincial Air Quality Task Force to address "how to improve local air quality in the Clarkson-Oakville Airshed through the reduction of air emissions from industrial, vehicular and residential sources." This is an AIR war, not a GROUND war, and there is NO SAFE PLACE in the Clarkson-Oakville Airshed for a gas-fired power plant.
The Guardian (UK) article (March 22, 2010): Pollution 'causing early deaths'. Excerpt: "Air pollution is causing the early deaths of up to 50,000 people a year and making thousands more ill - but the Government is failing to take enough action to tackle the problem, MPs have said. The UK should be 'ashamed' of its poor air quality and the harm it is causing to people's health and the environment, a report by the Commons Environmental Audit Committee said. The report said pollutants such as ozone, nitrogen oxides and "particulate matter" from transport and power stations contributed to conditions such as asthma, heart disease and cancer. The failure to reduce levels of pollution has 'enormous' costs for the NHS, and puts the UK at risk of multimillion-pound fines from Brussels for missing air quality targets, the committee said. ... The committee called for the Government to do more to raise awareness of the problem and for more joined up action between departments, as well as greater support to help local authorities address pollution and a shift in transport policy." MUST READ: Wood Smoke World blog 're-post' (March 22, 2010) of an Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP article originally appearing on the ACC Lexology website (March 16, 2010): New health protection air quality by-law in the Town of Oakville. Excerpt: "The [Oakville] Air By-law [2010-035] is controversial, being the first of its kind in Ontario. It was passed by the Town in response to extensive public lobbying to stop a proposed natural gas electrical generating facility from being located within its municipal boundaries in close proximity to residential areas. The fine particulate matter [FPM] and other compounds which the Air By-law seeks to regulate are currently not subject to approval limits provincially or federally. If other municipalities follow suit with similar by-laws, companies which are otherwise fully compliant with their provincial approvals may nevertheless be required to close. Thus far, the Air By-law has not been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board or through the courts. However, it is worth remembering that by-laws such as this one could face legal challenge on a number of grounds." Globe and Mail article (March 21, 2010): Critics slam Ontario Liberals’ green-energy levy. Excerpt: "'All of those people who are producing this so-called green power are profiting mightily at the expense of the consumer,' said [Progressive Conservative energy critic] Mr. [
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
, adding it amounts to another 'piling on' of costs to consumers. 'How much green do you think we can actually create in Ontario? We can't run the province on windmills', Mr. Yakabuski said. 'You have to have something you can control and dispatch.'" Hamilton Spectator opinion column, by Doug MacKenzie, president of C4CA (March 20, 2010): Gas generation, communities shouldn't mix. Excerpt: "Why put a power plant that will emit sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds and dangerous particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter, as well as the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, into an airshed that both federal and provincial environment studies have determined is already overly polluted and 'stressed'? ... Why are we rushing into building gas-fired power plants -- and mortgaging our financial future to the power company to the tune of $4 billion over the next 20 years -- when Ontario's demand for electricity has fallen off dramatically? We have the time to make sure we are doing the right thing." Toronto Star article (March 20, 2010): Ontario slaps new 'green' tax on electricity bills. Excerpt: "Ontario electricity customers will soon be slapped with an additional tax to cover $53 million of the Liberal government's new conservation and green energy programs, the Star has learned. ... A government document – innocuously entitled "Ontario Regulation Made Under The Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998, Assessments For Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure Conservation and Renewable Energy Program Costs" – outlines the fee in great detail. ... Energy and Infrastructure Minister This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it said the government was aware of the potential for backlash, but that's a small price to pay for cleaner air since conservation makes it easier to phase out coal-fired power plants by 2014. ... Promoting conservation is part of Premier Dalton McGuinty's push to transform Ontario into a leading jurisdiction for green energy, such as solar and wind power." MIRANET comment: The polluting gas-fired power plants needed to 'back-up' the intermittent renewables, and their contractual costs, never get mentioned in such announcements. Oakville MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , Press Release (March 19, 2010): MPP Flynn to Appeal OPA's Lack of Transparency. Excerpt: "MPP Kevin Flynn expressed frustration with the Ontario Power Authority's (OPA) response to a request for additional information on the selection process that resulted in the decision to allow TransCanada to build a natural gas power plant in Oakville. ... To date the OPA has refused to provide answers to the people of Oakville and yet maintains that it is running a transparent process. ... Flynn stated that this was not the response he was looking for and noted that he 'will be filing an appeal with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner' ... Flynn will introduce his Private Members' Bill next week that proposes a significant setback distance for natural gas power plants that have not received all municipal, provincial or federal permits." Clean Break blog, by Tyler Hamilton (March 18, 2010): Attention all suppliers: Ontario Power Generation needs your wood pellets!. Excerpt: "Let’s keep in mind these converted coal plants will be used as peakers when using biomass fuel. This means there is plenty of biomass available for several units being targeted for conversion at the massive Nanticoke coal plant. What we’re witnessing here is the beginning of the creation of an entirely new industry in Ontario developed around the need to economically harvest, pelletize and transport biomass fuel pellets to support the province’s coal phaseout strategy." MIRANET comment: Orangeville Citizen editorial (March 18, 2010): Even 'green' projects are in trouble!. Excerpt: "These days, it seems just about every imaginable large-scale project is in trouble with its potential neighbours, even when the projects are at least relatively 'green.' ... A second example is in Oakville, where a plan by Ontario Power Development (OPG) to erect a natural gas-fired power plant is getting opposition from local residents who see it as a significant source of air pollution. In both cases, the projects would clearly be far less harmful to the environment than the province’s remaining Nanticoke and Lambton coal-fired plants. However, one wonders why OPG didn’t opt to build the natural gas plant at the site of the old coal-fired Lakeview Generating Station in Mississauga." MIRANET RESPONSE: Please see the March 10, 2010 entry in the Lakeview Chronology article, the Nanticoke Option article, and Dr. Boyd Upper's remarks about the false assumption (used by the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) and others) that the stressed Clarkson-Oakville Airshed has ever been significantly affected by emissions from Nanticoke and Lambton coal-fired plants.
National Post article (March 18, 2010): Smog danger inflated: climate change critic. Excerpt: "A Canadian economist [Ross McKitrick] known for his controversial critique of climate-change science has turned his sights on the health effects of smog, concluding in a new study that pollution has no impact on the number of hospital admissions for respiratory illness. ... His critique in the journal Environmental Modelling and Software was peer-reviewed but failed to convince one respected scientist who follows the issue closely. Monica Campbell, a toxicologist and manager of the Toronto health department's environmental health office, said the majority of research - literally hundreds of studies - have found a link between pollution and health. She called some aspects of the professor's method 'troubling,' noting he failed to consider cardiovascular and other diseases linked to pollution." See McKitrick's blog entry below.
Financial Post FP Comment blog, by Ross McKitrick (March 17, 2010): Where are the bodies?. Excerpt: "The popular idea that current ambient air pollution has a powerful effect on lung health might look like it is based on a large empirical foundation, but on closer inspection the pile contains a lot of weak results. So the bottom line is that, for the purpose of assessing the link between air pollution levels and hospital admissions, one needs to look closely at the kinds of studies being done and how they did the statistical modeling." Aztext Press Solutions for Sustainability blog (March 17, 2010): Our dwindling supplies of natural gas. Excerpt: "Natural gas prices were at a seven-year low in September and it’s given a lot of people a false sense of security. The price of natural gas has started to head back up and I believe the upward trajectory of the curve will get steeper and steeper for a variety of reasons. First is demand. Organizations like Ontario Power Generation keep building natural gas power plants to deal with peak electricity demand because they are fast and relatively cheap to build. Second is short-term supply. The economic collapse, which destroyed demand, sidelined a huge amount of natural gas well drilling activity." Simcoe Examiner article (March 16, 2010): Group focuses on green energy crops. Excerpt: "Could the solution to what crop to grow on hundreds of acres of former tobacco land come from Mother Nature? The South Coast Grow Me Green Energy Association was formed in October 2009 with the intention of growing prairie grass for biomass fuel. ... Grow Me Green is concentrating on the biomass market and has already had meetings with potential end users such as Ontario Power Generation. It's estimated OPG will need more than 100,000 acres of prairie grass if the Nanticoke Generating Station was to switch to biofuel." Oakville Beaver article (March 12, 2010): Town says TransCanada’s report full of hot air. Excerpt: "Town staff and council are not buying claims made in TransCanada’s Draft Environmental Review Report (ERR) and are concerned the Oakville Generating Station will result in 'unacceptable risks to human health and safety.' The TransCanada report, which was completed by SENES Consultants Limited for TransCanada, states the 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant proposed for the Ford-owned lands at 1500 Royal Windsor Dr., will have little to no effect on the environment or the surrounding community during construction and operation. ... 'Based on the information included in the draft report, the Town and council believes that plant will add significant emissions of toxic air pollutants into Oakville’s already stressed airshed, in addition producing a vapour or ice plume from its stack that could make nearby highways, roads and train tracks dangerous in certain weather conditions,' said [Oakville Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ." London Free Press article (March 11, 2010): Burning biomass viewed as alternative to dirty coal. Excerpt: "Speaking at the Growing the Margins green energy conference Wednesday in London, Robert Lyng of Ontario Power Generation (OPG) said a study on the feasibility of switching to biomass in generating plants will be released next year. Ontario's Liberal government had vowed to shut down the plants -- among the province's dirtiest polluters -- by now, but has extended their lifetime to 2014 when they'll have to stop burning coal. ... the largest plants -- Lambton, near Sarnia, and the Nanticoke plant, could burn a combination of biomass and natural gas ... [which] would allow the plants to keep operating." National Post opinion column, by Terence Corcoran (March 11, 2010): Green energy bubbles. Excerpt: "While investment analysts are telling their clients to get out of solar power firms and warning about the continuing risks in wind and bioenergy schemes, Ottawa and the provinces are on a mad populist stampede to throw billions of dollars at the green energy monster. ... Despite the fundamental lack of economic justification for alternative energy, governments keep pumping air into the bubbles. ... None of these technologies — solar, wind, bioenergy — are economical on their own in competition with natural gas or coal — or even nuclear. ... Needless to say, all this is being driven by the fantasy of reducing and even eliminating carbon emissions so as to save the planet from global warming." NOTE: The gas-fired plants are being built to run in compensation for low-yield renewables. Globe and Mail article (March 11, 2010): Oakville temporarily blocks building of gas-fired power plant. Excerpt: "Oakville has temporarily blocked TransCanada Energy's plan to build a 900-megawatt natural gas-fired power plant next to the Ford car plant on the edge of the town. Tuesday night, the Committee of Adjustment denied applications from the energy company and from Ford Motors ... Oakville Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ... While he called the committee's denial 'good news,' he said he didn't know whether it would stop construction since the committee's decision can be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board." Mississauga News article (March 10, 2010): City wants to take page from Oakville. Excerpt: "Last month ... Oakville Town Council passed Health Protection & Air Quality Bylaw 2010-035 ... Under the new bylaw, the proposed power plant and all future major industries must apply for facility-specific approval of their proposed air emissions, whether or not they hold Provincial certificates of approval for their air emissions. Now Mississauga is considering taking a page from its neighbour. Today (March 10) at City Council, Ward 2 councillor Pat Mullin moved a resolution, passed unanimously, directing City staff to review Oakville’s latest bylaw and report back to Council on what would be required to develop and introduce a similar bylaw in Mississauga."
Town of Oakville, News Release (March 10, 2010): Town says health risks of power plant too great based on ERR. Excerpt: "The town has released a response to TransCanada Pipelines' draft Environmental Review Report (ERR) on the proposed power plant expressing concern that the plant will result in unacceptable risks to human health and safety. 'Based on the information included in the draft report, the town and Council believes the plant will add significant emissions of toxic air pollutants into Oakville's already stressed airshed, in addition to producing a vapour or ice plume from its stack that could make nearby highways, roads and train tracks dangerous in certain weather conditions,' said Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . 'We continue to call for an individual environmental assessment of the proposed power plant and for provincial regulation for fine PM and other health-risk air pollutants, which TransCanada's report indicates will be released into the Oakville-Clarkson airshed.'" Click here to view the 49-page Letter + Appendices sent by the Town of Oakville to TransCanada. Oakville Beaver article (March 10, 2010): Oakville’s major pollution emitters: Ford tops list of 14 companies that fail Oakville’s air quality bylaw. Excerpt: "According to the Province’s National Pollution Release Inventory (NPRI), 14 Oakville industries would be considered major emitters under the Town’s new Health Protection Air Quality Bylaw. The Ford Assembly Plant would be ranked as the worst among them. ... Under the bylaw, a facility is considered a major emitter if its emissions exceed at least one of the thresholds for the following pollutants: more than 500 kilograms of PM 10 (particulate matter) per year, more than 300 kilograms of PM 2.5 per year, more than a tonne of VOC (volatile organic compounds) per year, more than 2.7 tonnes of nitrogen oxide per year and more than 2 tonnes of sulphur dioxide per year." Includes table of major emitters. Oakville Beaver editorial (March 10, 2010): Wrong weapon. Excerpt: "We can understand Town Council’s desire to improve the community’s air quality and air quality standards. We can also understand its desire to come up with legislation to impede the construction of TransCanada’s 900 megawatt natural gas-fueled power plant on Royal Windsor Drive. However, in an effort to do so, the Town has come up with a Health Protection Air Quality Bylaw that creates an air of uncertainty for many local businesses. This includes 14 companies, which would be labeled major emitters based on the 2008 data from the Province’s National Pollution Release Inventory (NRPI)." Oakville Beaver article (March 10, 2010): War of words heats up. Excerpt: "The Ontario Power Authority’s (OPA) decision to bring a 900-megawatt gas-fired power plant to Oakville has sparked protests, preventative legislation and now appears to have strained the relationship between Ford of Canada and the mayor of Oakville. Oakville Mayor This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it has lashed out against Ford in recent interviews with the Oakville Beaver and 680 News, chastising the auto manufacturer for supplying the land on which TransCanada plans to build the Oakville Generating Station. ... Despite Ford’s status as one of the Town’s largest employers ... He has accused Ford of conspiring to bring the TransCanada operation to Oakville, which he described as ‘dirty’ and ‘dangerous.’" King Township Sentinel article (March 10, 2010): King residents go to fight ‘the good fight’ at Queen’s Park. Excerpt: "Concerned Citizens of King Township (CCKT) ... said that the Independent Electricity Supply Operators [IESO], who oversee electricity supply in Ontario, report that over the next 18 months demand for electricity in is expected to show very modest growth. Peak demand, on the other hand, is expected to decline as a result of targeted conservation programs and the deployment of smart meters and time-of-use rates for residential and small business customers. The Township is awaiting the commencement of hearings at the Ontario Municipal Board regarding the legality of placing power generation on protected lands within the Provincial Greenbelt and the suitability of the site which sits on a flood plain." National Post opinion column, by This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , CEO of the Ontario Power Authority (March 8, 2010): Setting the record straight on the Oakville Generating Station. Excerpt: "During last week's protest at Queen's Park against the proposed Oakville Generating Station, unfounded allegations were made about the competitive process used by the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) to select a new natural gas-fired power plant for the Southwest Greater Toronto Area. Those allegations were published in the National Post. As a result, the OPA has a responsibility to set the record straight." Print edition includes colour aerial map of the proposed location. HERE IS THE LINK TO THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Below is the YouTube recording of Mayor Burton's remarks: MUST READ: Financial Post column, by Michael Trebilcock (March 6, 2010): Blowing away taxpayers. Excerpt: "The Ontario government's rush into renewable energy, and industrial wind turbine-generated electricity in particular, is likely to reveal the law of unintended consequences. The government needs to rigorously re-evaluate this precipitous policy before committing billions more in subsidies to it. ... The contributions of industrial wind power to reducing CO2 emissions are at best marginal. Massive numbers of turbines are needed, and because of their intermittency and unpredictability, they require the availability of back-up generation, especially for peak-load capacity. In Denmark, Germany, the U.K., and now Ontario, this has entailed the construction of additional fossil fuel plants (typically natural gas plants) to provide reliability. These plants dramatically reduce the net contributions of wind power to CO2 abatement, which come at an extremely high cost relative to other abatement strategies (such as real-time pricing of electricity). ... As Jan Carr, former CEO of the Ontario Power Authority, puts it in a recent article: 'The recent rush to "green" Ontario's electricity system has produced a largely ad hoc approach to the selection and investment in power generation technologies that will unnecessarily increase the cost of electricity with far-reaching economic and social effects.'" Oakville Beaver opinion column (March 4, 2010): Town should not be regulating FPM, by John Sawyer, President, Oakville Chamber of Commerce. Excerpt: "A municipal air quality bylaw cannot achieve its stated objective of reducing levels of FPM [Fine Particulate Matter] in Oakville’s air. Studies have established that more than 70 per cent of the targeted emissions do not come from industry and that up to 50 per cent of the emissions originate from as far away as the Ohio Valley and the mid-western U.S. ... Oakville’s industrial base is small compared to other municipalities in and around our airshed. The potential reduction in emissions as a result of the Town’s bylaw will be less than one per cent. We need emission-reduction strategies supported by regulation." Mississauga South MPP This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , Press Release (March 2, 2010): Charles' Remarks at Queen's Park Rally. Excerpt: "I know that for many years our community has had concerns about the Cumulative effect of emissions and their impact on our health. ... That’s why I celebrated the demolition of the coal plant at Lakeview. ... I appreciate that my colleague, [Oakville MPP] This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , is also very engaged on this issue. However, my community is concerned about any proposal that, while excluding Oakville as a site for a new power plant, would allow, or even encourage, the siting of one in south Mississauga. As I and many in our two communities have often said, the issue is about the quality of our airshed. ... I would never suggest, as I am sure my colleague agrees, that such reductions should come at the expense of another community."
RALLY: Click here for a photo/quote montage
|
