WYNNE GOVERNMENT SHOULD CANCEL WIND POWER CONTRACTS FOR HYDRO BILL RELIEF

cancelwind_fb

NEWS RELEASE

November 21, 2016

Wind Concerns Ontario welcomes the acknowledgement by Premier Kathleen Wynne of financial hardship imposed by her government’s energy policies, and has sent six recommendations for action that will provide immediate relief.

“We know that energy poverty in Ontario is real and worsening under this government,” says WCO president Jane Wilson. “Hundreds of thousands of people are having difficulty paying their electricity bills, and many are having to choose between ‘heat and eat.’ Meanwhile, corporate power developers are getting paid huge profits in Ontario – this has to change, now.”

Wind Concerns Ontario sent the Premier a list of recommendations: 

  1. Immediately cancel LRP II renewable power program. Currently “suspended,” its target was to acquire 1,000 megawatts (MW) of power, even though the government says we have a “robust” supply of power for the future. The cost of this new capacity would go straight to Ontario’s electricity bills
  2. Cancel the five wind power contracts awarded under LRP I for 299 MW. This action will save ratepayers about $65 million annually and $1.3 billion over 20 years. Cancellation costs will amount to a small fraction of the annual cost, probably on the order of about $2 million, at most. In addition, cancelling approved but not yet built wind power projects, and the new FIT 5.0 program will also save money. Together, these cancellations can save ratepayers from future rate increases of nearly $4 per month.
  3. Cancel “conservation” spending of $400 million annually. This action would have an immediate effect on ratepayers’ bills, reducing them by $5.50 per month or about $70 a year. Ontario’s ratepayers have already reduced their consumption from 157 TWh in 2005 to 137 TWh in 2015, for a significant 12.7% decrease.
  4. Allocate the Ontario Electricity Support Program (OESP) to the Ministry of Community and Social Services. The OESP is essentially a social assistance program and it is questionable as to whether ratepayers should bear the burden of its costs. With an estimated annual cost of $200 million, the effect of this would be an immediate savings of about $4 per month on ratepayers’ bills, and an annual savings of $50. We recognize, however, that the move would impact the budgetary shortfall by a like amount so we recommend the following action.
  5. Levy a tax on wind and solar power generation on a per-megawatt basis starting at $10 per/MWh. This would result in raising sufficient revenues to offset the OESP costs. The effective rate could be held at that level or increased in the event the OESP costs exceed the forecast $200 million per annum. The Auditor General previously reported the award value per MWh of the 20-year contracts to wind and solar power developers exceeded those in other jurisdictions by a considerable margin. The tax would serve as a recognition of those excessive margins. (Note: the wind power contracts also contain cost of living increases of up to 20% over the term of the contracts.)
  6. Immediately reduce the Time of Use (TOU) off-peak rate. We recommend an immediate reduction in the TOU off-peak rate from 8.7 cents/kWh to 7.4 cents/kWh to encourage the shift of power consumption from peak to off-peak time in order to flatten daily demand.

“Poverty is a major factor in population health,” says Wilson, a Registered Nurse. “It is time Ontario takes action to help people now, and not cause further hardship for Ontario families.”

Wind Concerns Ontario is a coalition of community groups, individuals and families concerned about the impact of industrial-scale wind power development on the economy, on the natural environment, and on human health in Ontario.

 

Contact:

Jane Wilson, President: president@windconcernsontario.ca

Parker Gallant, Vice-president: parker.gallant@gmail.com

Comments

Andre Lauzon
Reply

IF she could only listen to common sense and look seriously at your proposals! Elections are coming back……….she is starting to panic.

Ron Hartlen
Reply

Terrific recommendations.
Well done.

Victor Laface
Reply

Great recommendations ,Our Government is supposed to listen when the People Speak, on Issues of great concern and not do what there high priced friends want.

Sommer
Reply

Residents in Huron County who have been/are being harmed by industrial wind turbines have sent many complaint to the office of Premier Wynne and all that they ever get back is a canned statement, sent within minutes by a robotic device, saying that she is grateful and she values their feedback.
This is infuriating.

Maks Zupan
Reply

All dogmatic and wishful thinking of Wynne’s government will not convince the wind to blow in the nominal range more than some 450 hours (of 8760) per year. Time for some realistic and critical thinking. Stop the TOTAL waste of billions of dollars!

whooper
Reply

Fantastic recommendations! Lets hope they listen!

James Finan
Reply

These recommendations are all excellent & cut to the core of the Wynne government’s ruinous “green” energy program. Apparently, Ms Wynne has publicly embraced her “mistake” of allowing Ontario electrical costs to skyrocket. To categorize the economic chaos that the Wynne Liberals have visited on Ontario through their pursuit of environmentally & economically destructive radical environmentalism as a “mistake” is a woefully inadequate response. This “mea culpa” is nothing but deceptively pious electioneering. Hopefully, Ontario voters will not be seduced by this misleading display of disingenuous concern.

Richard Mann
Reply

Here is a “time line” showing the history of Wind Turbine Noise problems, going back as far as 1979. Each entry provides documentation:
http://cdn.knightlab.com/libs/timeline/latest/embed/index.html?source=0Ak2bgr7C0nhPdGR3S1lEekU3T3p4ZDhUNDdRV2Y2ZkE&font=Bevan-PotanoSans&maptype=toner&lang=en&height=650

1979 “First complaints received from a dozen families within a 3km radius of turbine”.
1981 “Wind turbine operation creates enormous sound pressure waves”
1982 “Closed windows and doors do not protect occupants from LFN”
1982 “NASA research on human impacts provided to wind industry”
1985 “Hypothesis for infrasound-induced motion sickness”
1987 “Wind industry told that dB(A) unsuitable to measure LFN emissions from wind turbines”

2004 “Wind industry knows noise models inadequate” (from Vestas)

2011 “Vestas knew that low frequency noise from larger turbines needed greater setbacks”

Richard Mann
Reply

The problem is Wind and Solar are not reducing C02 and our government will not admit this costly failure. Ontario’s professional Engineers, those tasked with generation, transmission and billing, have reported the problem. our government continues to build more wind and solar.

Reference: “Ontario’s Electricity Dilemma – Achieving Low Emissions at Reasonable Electricity Rates”. Ontario Society of Professional Engineers (OSPE). April 2015.
(Archived at: http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.ospe.on.ca/resource/resmgr/DOC_advocacy/2015_Presentation_Elec_Dilem.pdf)

Page 15 of 23. “Why Will Emissions Double as We Add Wind and Solar Plants ?”

– Wind and Solar require flexible backup generation.

– Nuclear is too inflexible to backup renewables without expensive engineering changes to the reactors.

– Flexible electric storage is too expensive at the moment.

– Consequently natural gas provides the backup for wind and solar in North America.

– When you add wind and solar you are actually forced to reduce nuclear generation to make room for more natural gas generation to provide flexible backup.

– Ontario currently produces electricity at less than 40 grams of CO2 emissions/kWh.

– Wind and solar with natural gas backup produces electricity at about 200 grams of CO2 emissions/kWh. Therefore adding wind and solar to Ontario’s grid drives CO2 emissions higher. From 2016 to 2032 as Ontario phases out nuclear capacity to make room for wind and solar, CO2 emissions will double (2013 LTEP data).

– In Ontario, with limited economic hydro and expensive storage, it is mathematically impossible to achieve low CO2 emissions at reasonable electricity prices without nuclear generation.

Barbara
Reply

Correction: Hydro-One that is mentioned in the article.

Sommer
Reply

Thanks Richard for your consistent effort to educate people on these key issues. Getting through to some people seems almost impossible.
The residents in Huron County who are still being harmed by industrial wind turbines that were sited too close to their homes and who are struggling to figure out how to pay their hydro bills, all the while experiencing the harm from noise, low frequency noise modulations and infrasound radiation. are ‘at their wits end’, having tried everything they can think of to get through to those who are responsible for this mess.

Jjoe
Reply

Cancel any contracts that would not result in lawsuits. Being sued will save us zero dollars. I think there should be a much lower fourth rate. From about midnight to about 4 am. People, who have dishwashers, washers, dryers etc with timers, could take advantage of the low rate. It would also sell this hydro at a higher rate than we get ‘selling’ it to other provinces/states. A tax on wind and solar power might be against the contractual conditions already written up. If so, doing it would result in lawsuits. Also possible NAFTA challenges.

Jjoe
Reply

The contracts written in Ontario may forbid the imposition of new or higher taxes. It is an area that could be explored. However, NAFTA would also be a consideration.

Barbara
Reply

Also, NAFTA is a trade agreement and NOT a treaty.

Jjoe
Reply

It doesn’t matter what NAFTA is. It allows companies to bypass a country’s court system and go directly to a tribunal.

The Huffington Post did an article on it. (1)

The Wolfe Island Windfarm (Windstream) is suing Ontario/Canada using a NAFTA tribunal now. (2)

(1). http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/01/14/canada-sued-investor-state-dispute-ccpa_n_6471460.html

(2). http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/topics-domaines/disp-diff/gov.aspx?lang=eng

Jjoe
Reply

“These tribunals are established under NAFTA Chapter 11 to ensure that foreign investors have access to an independent international tribunal when the rights promised to them in the NAFTA have been violated.”

http://www.naftaclaims.com

Wind Concerns Ontario
Reply

To clarify, the contracts awarded for wind power generation earlier in 2016 under LRP I have a clause in them that allows for pre-construction liability, i.e., terms for cancellation. There would be no need to involve NAFTA if the contract already allows for the possibility of cancellation.

Jjoe

If the cancellation fell within the terms of cancellation you might be correct. If the companies were Mexican or American and the cancellations fell outside the terms of cancellation or the companies felt that they did fall outside the terms NAFTA would apply. I am on record, on this very website, of being in favour of cancelling any windfarms that would not generate lawsuits. We must proceed slowly and careful. We save nothing if we get sued and lose.

Barbara
Reply

There is a legal difference between a trade agreement and a treaty.

In the U.S. it’s possible that trade agreement terms are easier to change than changes in a treaty.

Migratory Birds are a treaty issue.

Hope this may help in your discussion of NAFTA issues.

Jjoe
Reply

Sorry if this turns out to be a double. I posted earlier and it seems to have gone into cyber limbo.

Barbara it doesn’t matter what NAFTA is or isn’t. NAFTA allows companies to bypass a country’s court system and go directly to a tribunal.
“NAFTAClaims.com provides free access to the decisions, orders and awards of NAFTA investor-state tribunals. These tribunals are established under NAFTA Chapter 11 to ensure that foreign investors have access to an independent international tribunal when the rights promised to them in the NAFTA have been violated.” (1)

Canada has been sued using these tribunals many times already. (2)

In fact, Canada/Ontario are being sued at the moment regarding the Wolfe Island Windfarm (Windstream) cancellation. (3)

(1) http://www.naftaclaims.com

(2) http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/01/14/canada-sued-investor-state-dispute-ccpa_n_6471460.html

(3). http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/topics-domaines/disp-diff/gov.aspx?lang=eng

Wind Concerns Ontario
Reply

You are posting more links than the web host will allow in a comment.

Parker Gallant
Reply

Worth noting: OPG segmented results for 2015 report they generated $1,619 million in revenue from their hydro assets and paid fuel costs of $345 million

Barbara
Reply

Journal Of The Canadian Academy Of Child And Adolescent Psychiatry, Fall, 2014

Scroll down to: Current State of Sleep Health in Canadian children and Adolescents

Both of the above articles have information on the health effects of sleep deprivation.

https:www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4197518

There is more information on this subject online.

Rural parents should be aware of health effects on children from excessive noise.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Excellent recommendations and articles by all….. let’s please not forget that the liberal government is sneaking in hidden carbon taxes on our natural gas bills as well…. soon enough we will have natural gas poverty in the province just like the hydro poverty the liberal government has created….
Also please prepare yourselves for the pay as you go hydro system coming in 2017…. all Hydro None customers in arrears will be shifted to the ” pay if you can ” system leaving tens of thousands of hard working Ontarions literally “in the dark and out in the cold” !!! Remember the story of the scorpion and the frog!!!! Admitting you screwed up is one thing ….. fixing it is another!!!!

Maks Zupan
Reply

Right on, Richard!
I mentioned already that wind turbines operate at or near design capacity only a few hundreds of hours per year. The rest are intermittent short bursts which only cause the instability in the grid, with the results described by Richard. Total capacity factor of wind turbines is only about 17%. We will always need the full backup, even if we double or triple the existing wind capacity- which would only increase the instability and air pollution.
Indeed, why it is so difficult to educate. Why do these social workers and lawyers (energy ministers, why not an engineer?) in Wynne government ignore PEO recommendations??
The simple reality is that wind does not blow when we need it most. This summer I watched the actual wind contribution to the Ontario grid (just go to IESO). The typical peak demand was around 20.000MW. The wind contribution was about 250MW, often many days in a row, out of some 3400 MW installed. A clear proof that wind will never be able to supply a reliable power needed for our modern society. The cost of storage would be astronomical. No practical solutions in sight.

As a professional power engineer myself, I will add, for even more clarity, another “engineering” evaluation of the wind power: It is like a drunken employee who only shows up for work on his own erratic schedule, mostly to just disrupt the full time workers. On top of that, this sloppy drunk demands a far higher salary!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Intermittent and unreliable…..
No further questions your Honour……

Barbara
Reply

The MOH’s wife is on the Board of an organization which advocates for renewable energy. Could this constitute a direct or indirect connection/link of the organization right into the OLA?

Do an internet search for this information!

Jjoe
Reply

Barbara. Is it a paid position? Does she receive any other material benefit? If no, it looks like, on the surface at least, ok. Some members of WCO belong to poilitical parties. Seems like the same sort of situation.

Barbara
Reply

This is the Suzuki Foundation Board. Search-out what they advocate for.

Wind Wraith
Reply

Taxing the turbines that are functioning does nothing to address the issue that they are causing harm!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The reality that wind turbines are a scam has not changed since the very first ones were erected.

Wind Concerns Ontario
Reply

This is a very big “Big Picture” — Ontario needs to stop doing more harm by adding more unneeded intermittent power.

Wind Wraith
Reply

Point number 5 (taxing current turbines) does not address ‘the big picture’… it gives ‘justification’ to harming people, animals and the environment.

Jjoe
Reply

Taxing, I think, would be used more as way to put the turbines out of business. Remove the profit motive. However, if this was the strategy we would have to be careful to not put them out of business and get left having to pay the deconstruction costs.

Barbara

And your point is making it too expensive for IWT developers to do business in Ontario?

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Hell ya Wind Wraith…. largest shift of intergenerational wealth squandered by liberals idealology in the history of the country….
hands down!!!

Barbara
Reply

Essex County has lost much of its auto sector, Heinz and now the greenhouse business are thinking of moving.

When businesses leave, tax base is lost.

Jjoe
Reply

The high value of the loonie and corporate restructuring seemed to play a larger role in Heinzs decision. Heinz announced the closure of two other plants the same day. Both were in the US. warren Buffet had recently bought Heinz and started the cutting in order to drive up profits. Electricity price was not cited by Heinz in the closure announcement. (1) Excess capacity was cited. (2)

Heinz now buys products made at its old plant by a new company. This new company pays the same hydro rate that Heinz did. Heinz feels it is more profitable to let someone else make these products. (3)

(1). http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/heinz-to-close-ontario-plant-cut-800-jobs/article15442338/

(2). http://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/heinz-leamington-announcement-expected-today

(3). http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/heinz-closes-leamington-plant-740-people-out-of-work-1.2426608

Barbara
Reply

If anyone mentions the high cost of Hydro power in Ontario, they just might be stepping on some people’s tails?

Jjoe

They were shutting their biggest plant in the province. I doubt they were worried about stepping on toes. Businesses get to write off input costs, like hydro, from their taxes. I would think that they are less sensitive to the cost. Less sensitive not uncareing.

Leave a Reply to Wind Concerns OntarioCancel reply

name*

email* (not published)

website