Liberal's Green Energy Act a disaster for Ontario rate payers

[valve37]

Ontario's Green Energy Act causing energy prices to soar; plan now 10 times costlier than alternative that would have yielded the same environmental benefits

TORONTO, ON—Ontario’s Green Energy Act (GEA) will soon put the province at or near the top of North American electricity costs, with serious consequences for the province’s economic growth and competitiveness, concludes a new report from the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian think-tank.

“Already, the GEA has caused major price increases for large energy consumers, and we’re anticipating additional hikes of 40 to 50 per cent over the next few years,” said Ross McKitrick, Fraser Institute senior fellow and author of Environmental and Economic Consequences of Ontario’s Green Energy Act.

“The Ontario government defends the GEA by referring to a confidential 2005 cost-benefit analysis on reducing air pollution from power plants. That report did not recommend pursuing wind or solar power, instead it looked at conventional pollution control methods which would have yielded the same environmental benefits as the GEA, but at a tenth of the current cost. If the province sticks to its targets for expanding renewables, the GEA will end up being 70 times costlier than the alternative, with no greater benefits.”

Environmental and Economic Consequences of Ontario’s Green Energy Act analyzes the GEA and its effects on economic competitiveness and environmental improvement in Ontario. The report calculates that the manufacturing and mining sectors will be particularly hard hit by rising energy costs, with returns to investment in manufacturing likely to decline by 29 per cent, mining by 13 per cent, and forestry by less than one per cent.

“Provincial efforts to shield these industries through energy subsidy programs only transfer the costs onto Ontario taxpayers, who are already dealing with skyrocketing residential electricity prices,” McKitrick said.

“Overall, GEA-related energy cost increases will yield a net loss of investment and employment in Ontario, in pursuit of environmental benefits that could have been obtained at a fraction of the cost.”

Gone with the wind

The study shows that the GEA’s focus on wind generation is particularly wasteful: 80 per cent of Ontario’s wind-power generation occurs when electricity demand is so low that the entire output is surplus and must be dumped on the export market at a substantial loss. The Auditor General of Ontario estimates that the province has already lost close to $2 billion on surplus wind exports, and figures from the electricity grid operator show the ongoing losses are $200 million annually.

The wind grid is also inherently inefficient due to the fluctuating nature of the power source. The report calculates that due to seasonal patterns, seven megawatts of wind energy are needed to provide a year-round replacement of one megawatt of conventional power.

“Consequently, the cost of achieving renewable energy targets for the coming years will be much higher than the Ontario government’s current projections,” McKitrick said.

“In fact, air emissions may start going up under the GEA if the growing surplus of wind and solar power necessitates taking one of Ontario’s nuclear power plants offline.”

The Ontario government has also backtracked on its original claim that the GEA would create 50,000 jobs, a projection that failed to account for permanent job losses due to electricity price increases under the GEA. The province has also admitted that the vast majority of GEA-related jobs will be temporary.

“The overall effect of the GEA will be to increase unit production costs, diminish competitiveness, cut the rate of return to capital in key sectors, reduce employment, and make households worse off,” McKitrick said.

“And all for some small emission reductions that could have been obtained at a fraction of the cost.”

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/news/display.aspx?id=19538

[valve37]

Former Premier Dalton McGuinty’s signature Green Energy and Green Economy Act (2009) has lead to mass job losses in coal production, manufacturing, and countless other industries, has contributed to our colossal debt in Ontario, and has established Ontario as the highest-priced energy jurisdiction in Canada.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) is calling for the government to dismantle the Green Energy Act once and for all. Instead of doubling down on this failed experiment as the recent plan suggests, the government should take steps to phase out failed energy sources and scrap the green subsidies like the Feed-in-Tariff scheme.

The CTF also recommends eliminating the Ontario Clean Energy Benefit so taxpayers stop giving ratepayers a 10 per cent rebate on their household energy bill. This is a cynical tool used to mask the soaring costs of green energy and still costs taxpayers $1.1 billion.

By following these recommendations and eliminating these costly programs, the average Ontario household could save hundreds of dollars per year. That is a lot of money, especially for folks still struggling in our economy. 

The Wynne government should think about the people who suffer the most from irresponsible government decisions and stop letting poorly designed green programs guide our energy policies in Ontario.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/59703

[ilurkthereforiam]

Don't look at me.

I didn't vote for them.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

Neither did I.

[nuvistors]

Any program that  purchases something for $0.80  (some roof mounted solar)  or $0.60  ( ground mount solar and most  wind mills)   and sells it on the wholesale electricity market for less than $0.05  is doomed to failure.

 Add to that the times when the US is  paid to take the excess power generated by these inefficient  devices    and the outcome becomes a horrendous burden to the taxpayer.

[owlgebra]

I'm not from Ontario, but I do know from experience that there are better sources of facts than these so-called think tanks such as the one linked in the OP.  They are purely political instruments.

[valve37]

Move to Ontario and get the facts that count when you open your energy bill now and in the future. Shutting down nuclear power plants and going with solar and wind is just dumb, why the turbines were motionless here the other day. Politically speaking the Liberal government here donates $25 million a year to the Suzuki Foundation, I suppose to get David's green energy blessing.   

[dipmicro]

There is nothing wrong with wind and solar, they are not "failed energy sources" some progressive datacenters run mostly on their own energy from these two sources. Wind and solar complement each other, because wind is stronger and more likely during night or low sunlight. With little imagination we can say that wind energy is practically a rechargeable Earth battery that charges from solar energy heating air and creating air currents.

The subsidy is the problem. And it's real counterproductive, because it creates room for profiteering and since many countries implement these subsidies, profiteers and speculators drive the cost of technology high. If not for subsidies and profiteering, technologies would become more affordable and widely adopted.

I have looked at cost of installing solar and break/even point was about 20-25yr in the future not taking into account maintenance, that's too much. If prices of technology were not artificially high, maybe the break-even point would be 3yrs and every other house would have solar cells. Also mass adoption and competition stimulates innovation (look at smartphones, BlueRay, LCD/LED panels, etc - all technologies started dramatically evolving after mass adoption), so we would see much more efficient panels at the 1/10th price of what they are today.

I say scrap the Green Energy Act and stop the subsidies. Pay the settlements from lawsuits of the profiteers who already invested in technology and move on. If they stop the subsidy, in 10 years everyone will have solar cells on the roof.

[valve37]

Dear Supporter, Ontario Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli unveiled Ontario’s 20-year energy policy last week, and it wasn’t pretty. Expect a 33% increase in your household energy bill over the next three years, and a 42% increase by 2018. Average residential hydro bills will jump to $178 per month in 2018. The monthly costs attributed to green energy will explode to $31 per month by 2018, which represents an astonishing 1,450% increase from 2010. As for Minister Chiarelli’s plan to help Ontario families and businesses pay for the soaring costs of living in Ontario? Install solar panels. From the cancelled gas plants in Mississauga and Oakville, to the billions and billions in various green subsidies, this government’s management of the energy file is destroying our standard of living in Ontario. This needs to stop. That is why the CTF is calling on the government to dismantle the Green Energy Act once and for all. Can you sign our petition demanding the Premier Wynne reverse the Ontario government’s disastrous green energy policies? You can sign the petition here: https://www.taxpayer.com/resource-centre/petitions/petition?tpContentId=84
Once you’ve signed the petition, can you forward this email to your friends, co-workers and family and encourage them to sign the petition as well? Thanks for all you do,

• Candice, Scott, Shannon and the entire CTF team

P.S.: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has never, and will never accept a government grant or any funding. We rely on the financial support of people like you. If you think fighting against the Wynne government’s disastrous green energy policies is important, please consider making a financial contribution today. You can make your donation through our secure website

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

If our governments had half a brain and weren't being bought off by large corporations, they would be promoting and financing technology and development to create individual home energy sources in order to eventually take everyone off the grid. This would make Canada a leading force in the world for green energy and create a massive amount of jobs.

[valve37]

No need to invent anything new it's already here, geothermal heating and cooling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_heating

[valve37]

Now Kellogs London, is it any wonder!

The solution:

Lower labour costs, lower unsustainable energy costs, become competitive with the rest of the world like the US is doing..

[cybertrader77]

Why isn't energy in Ontario free? The amount of hot air and flatulence Rob Ford produces must create a massive surplus.

[pierrelebel]

"Lower labour costs, lower unsustainable energy costs, become competitive with the rest of the world like the US is doing.."

???

Why is Kellogs leaving London? High labour costs?  High energy costs?

How about a reality check? 

Many of the London jobs will be added to the newer more efficient plant in Belleville, Ontario.  Same labour costs, same energy costs.

There is more to making a business decision than to follow the conservative agenda.

[valve37]

Please consider the overall consequences of the McGuinty/Wyne Government on Ontario and not just the Kellogg situation.

"Same labour costs, same energy costs", that's unfortunate for Kelloggs Belleville may be next.

[valve37]

"Same labour costs, same energy costs". well not according to this article.

"But the newer Belleville plant, Martin says, is not unionized and its workers, who started at about $20 an hour, make less than their London counterparts." Not likely to attract many London laid off workers.

Huge drop from London $30 - 35! $63k/yr to produce corn flakes? Widely discussed on a call in radio program, hard to justify those kind of wages in this environment.  

  The province is partly to blame for Kellogg’s plant closure in London, Ont.: Mike Moffatt

The consequences of corporate welfare

The Kellogg Company announced today that it is closing its London, Ont., plant. The plant has over 500 full-time employees, though only 400 are losing their jobs from this action as last month it was announced that 110 workers would be laid off in January.  This is terrible news for a city that has suffered greatly over the past few years with the closures of Electro-Motive Diesel and McCormick-Beta Brands, and particularly for the local food-processing industry with the closure of the Heinz factory in Leamington fresh in everyone’s minds.

Whenever a plant closes there is an undeserved knee-jerk reaction to blame governments at all levels.  However, this case may be the exception where such a reaction could be warranted.  Questions need to be raised about the Ontario government’s possible role in this plant closure. On the surface it would appear that at least some of the lost London production went to Belleville, Ont., thanks to a $9.7-million interest-free loan in 2008 from the province and $4.5 million in additional provincial funding in 2011 (it is not clear if this money was a loan or a grant). The net effect of this expenditure of taxpayer dollars appears to have been to shift production from higher wage employees in London to lower wage employees in Belleville (though their jobs may not be safe either). This incident is an extreme example of the potential unintended consequences of corporate welfare.

This will not be the last plant closure in Southwestern Ontario, and I suspect the provincial government’s funding of the Belleville plant only sped up the inevitable in London. With the U.S. population gradually moving south and west, Ontario lacks a geographic advantage when it comes to mass consumer manufacturing. Geography gave the region an advantage in the past for goods that are relatively expensive to ship relative to their value, such as breakfast cereal. But as American populations move from Michigan and Ohio to Texas and California, Ontario’s transport-cost competitive advantage over areas such as the U.S. southeast and Asia diminishes, making those areas more attractive due to their lower labour costs.  London’s suffering is likely far from over.

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2011/04/08/17923796.html