Wind farm procurement process not needed says Wind Concerns Ontario

Ontario's wind power program has never undergone a cost-benefit analysis, and has contributed significantly to increasing electricity bills. Not needed.
Ontario’s wind power program has never undergone a cost-benefit analysis, and has contributed significantly to increasing electricity bills. Not needed.

February 2, 2015

The Independent Electricity Systems Operator of IESO has delayed the start of its new Large Renewable Procurement (LRP) process, which was originally scheduled to begin today.

The delay is to work out more details stemming from comments filed during the public comment period, said renewables manager Adam Butterfield during a recent presentation, in which he also said the IESO’s goal is to have a “robust product that meets industry needs.”

Wind Concerns Ontario believes procurement of further wind power generation is not needed in Ontario, and here’s why:

  • The Ontario government has achieved its core objective of closing the power plants using coal as fuel.
  • Ontario has a surplus of power; no increase in demand is predicted. Ontario exported enough power during September-November 2014 to power 584,000 homes. There is no reason to add more capacity at this time.
  • The Ontario government is enacting a program to encourage conservation of power use.
  • While a decrease in nuclear power is expected due to refurbishment of one or more facilities, wind power cannot replace the baseload power provided by nuclear.
  • Renewable sources of electricity such as wind are expensive, and have been responsible in large part for the increase in electricity bills to consumers; this situation is already causing hardship for people on low or fixed incomes.

Given all these circumstances, it is our view that the IESO needs to step back and undertake a full needs assessment and independent cost-benefit analysis. Two successive Auditors General have pointed out (2012 and 2014) that NO cost-benefit analysis has ever been done for Ontario’s renewables program. The current Auditor General has also announced that her office will be reviewing how the power system is planned, throughout 2015.

We would further suggest a review of current contracts for wind power generation facilities not connected to the grid; these contracts have expired—terminating them and the cost of that action would be preferable to imposing a greater burden on Ontario ratepayers for the next 20 years.

Public opposition to the high-impact, low-benefit installation of utility-scale wind power facilities will continue and will intensify through legal proceedings.

We request that a moratorium be placed on further wind power generation, and that a full financial analysis of Ontario’s electricity rates is completed.

Contact us at



saving the moon

Now this makes sense/cents. Common sense. Now to get it through the decision makers heads, Kathleen Wynne! Listen to the people paying for your retirement- we’re fed up. Stop all the flawed GEA plans that are robbing me. Like the BALA FALLS.


Notice the use of the word ROBUST which is often used in energy discussions.

What does this word really mean? Why not use good, workable, possible or something else?

This renewable energy affair is not about making sense anyway. This is about creating the new green economy while making a few very rich in the process.

An artificial demand was created for IWTs, solar and begin with.


Time to put an end to green energy stupidity. The only thing green about green energy is the money that changes hands. It is making a few rich at the expense of the general population. Alternative energy is not the answer. let us develop more water power, up to date coal plants etc. Gas is a possible replacement for the turbines, but it is not true base load. When we conserve we are penalized, when we use we are penalized…it is an unjust system. It will be interesting to see in future years what boards of directors some politicians once retired will except a position on.


How much clearer could this possibly be? You’ve brought forth the sheer logic behind the need to change course as quickly as possible?
Thanks to those who prepared this statement!

R Budd

I’m wondering how this statement of fact (a very good one) from WCO is being distributed to the public. Hopefully at least as a press release, but it likely needs to be more forecfully presented.
As always the GTA is the target that must to be reached. So what is the strategy beyond posting here?

Wind Concerns Ontario

We did send out a limited news release but have not the resources to pay for a larger one. It costs hundreds of dollars to send out a short statement.A few media outlets have picked up the story but none in Toronto. Watch CTV London News tonight to see the story.

Leave a comment


email* (not published)