Where do I start?
It is obvious that your government has lost its way when it comes to Ontario energy policies. The sudden cancellation of future wind turbines due to unknown potential health affects, the moratorium on the grossly generous FIT program, and now the approval by the Ontario Energy Board of rate hikes to compensate for interest rate over-charging by OPG/Hydro One clearly shows that your party is lost when it comes to the realities of this so-called green energy plan.
Regarding the wind turbines, how is it that the setback for off-shore turbines is five kilometres, yet on-shore setbacks are 550 meters? Why is it that we’re afraid to put these turbines too close to shorelines, but we’re OK with putting them in people’s back yards? This makes absolutely no sense.
Because of your government’s zeal to push it’s green energy plan, the City of Thunder Bay has invested a huge amount of time and money into wind farms in and around the city, and now must deal with a multi-million dollar lawsuit because it tried to create a balance between the Liberals’ insistence on this agenda and its own citizens.
We are yet to learn how much more it is going to cost once projects that have already had the green light get cancelled and even more lawsuits begin.
Whether the municipality or the provincial government pays for this mess, the bottom line is we, the taxpayers, are going to be on the hook for it.
As for the FIT program whereby solar and other green energy off-grid power systems are set up by average citizens and businesses on their own lands and at their own cost, this too has become a red herring. It was obvious right from the get-go that the guaranteed price rate for feed-in excess power was exorbitant and not cost effective. Yes, you have reduced the guaranteed rate, but at the expense of those who have already invested serious money in good faith, and I fear, at the expense of power-using customers and Ontario taxpayers as a flurry of class-action lawsuits start.
Now, the Ontario Energy Board has approved yet another rate increase on top of the upcoming 46-per-cent rate hike already predicted over the next five years, because OPG/Hydro One made yet another mistake by over-charging interest rates on delinquent accounts. Those who use the services are now expected to pay for the $18-million penalty. It is obvious the OEB has this delusional expectation that regardless of circumstances, costs will be passed on to end users and/or taxpayers. End of story.
I have a suggestion. Why doesn’t the OEB pull its pompous, out-of-touch head out of its butt and tell OPG/Hydro One to recoup those costs through efficiencies within their operations? The private sector has been forced to do that over the last couple of years because they simply could not continue to pass on their costs to their customers. The OEB, as do all government-regulated boards, has to come to the realization that the days of “cost-plus” are gone.
With these and other past mistakes, it is clear that publicly-held and -controlled entities cannot manage nor control costs effectively. With that realization, perhaps it is time to seriously look at privatizing OPG/Hydro One. Obviously, there will be those who will suggest that doing so will lead to even higher costs. But given that such entities as TBayTel have generated revenues for the city and have managed well in a fiercely competitive market, I see no reason why OPG/Hydro One couldn’t follow that same model.
People of Thunder Bay and Ontario should be mad as hell over this debacle created by your government, and rightly so. I know I am. I am a believer that we must make the move to greener, more efficient practices, but the transition must be done over many years, not by tomorrow, and not at any cost.
Len Day, Thunder Bay
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
YOUR HYDRO PAYMENTS WENT TO THE LIBERAL PARTY COFFERS
That is correct. City/municipal utilities donated to the Ontario Liberals.
The Ontario Energy Board ruled that such can be done as long as the donations come from shareholder dividends. ("shareholders" of utilities are the municipalities and cities. They get a yearly dividend payment from the utilities. The City of Toronto got some $166 million in dividends in 2004/2005 see this.)
What?
What's the difference? All revenue to utilities comes from YOUR BILLS!!!
This is absolute madness.
The Ontario Energy Board ruled that such can be done as long as the donations come from shareholder dividends. ("shareholders" of utilities are the municipalities and cities. They get a yearly dividend payment from the utilities. The City of Toronto got some $166 million in dividends in 2004/2005 see this.)
What?
What's the difference? All revenue to utilities comes from YOUR BILLS!!!
This is absolute madness.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Opposition parties calls Ontario Energy Board ruling a ‘scam’
Once Again Ontario Families Stuck with the Bill…This Time for Illegal, Interest Charges and High Priced Lawyers
by Rob Ferguson , Toronto Star
The government is standing idly by as electricity ratepayers get hit in the pocketbook again, opposition parties charged Wednesday in the wake of the latest Ontario Energy Board ruling.
This time it’s a decision that local electrical utilities — on the losing end of a Supreme Court case for charging interest rates of over 60 per cent on late bill payments — can get the $18 million back from customers across the board.
“It’s a scam,” Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak shot at Energy Minister Brad Duguid in the Legislature’s daily question period, saying the Liberals have turned the energy board into “another McGuinty tax collection agency.”
“Why is it when Ontario families even win in the courts you still make them pay the price of illegal activity?”
The typical residential customer will see an extra 20 to 30 cents a month on their electricity bills for two years.
Duguid said the government has directed its transmission utility Hydro One not to charge the money to customers it serves directly and that he “strongly recommends” local utilities across the province will follow that lead.
“It’s a decision they will have to make,” Duguid told reporters, noting all utilities are governed by local boards subject to public pressure.
The government should be standing up for consumers given dramatic increases in electricity prices over the last few years, said New Democrat Leader Andrea Horwath.
“Any minister who expects everybody to just play nice is, I think, a little bit naïve,” she added.
“It’s not a lot of money but, again, it shows nobody’s paying attention to the fact that folks are tapped out and this is another slap in the face.”
Duguid said the high interest charges on late payments date to the early 1980s when the Progressive Conservatives were in power under then-premier Bill Davis, and a lawsuit challenging the practice was subsequently launched in 1998 with a court decision in 2010.
“Governments of all stripes were in power when this was taking place,” he said. “We’re not passing the buck.”
The Supreme Court first ruled in 2004 that late payment penalties charged by natural gas companies exceeded the 60 per cent limit allowed under Canadian law, and legal attention then switched to electric utilities.
They agreed it would be impossible to find and reimburse customers who had paid the exorbitant charges, so the money collected was paid into a United Way fund to help families pay their winter heating bills. The utilities then sought the energy board’s permission to recover the money from all customers, including those who paid their bills on time.
That means even customers who were in good standing get a penalty, said Hudak.
“What a bunch of nonsense.”
Meanwhile, the NDP revealed a freedom-of-information request showing the government expected to take in an extra $1.6 billion a year as the 8 per cent provincial portion of the 13 per cent HST was extended to electricity, gasoline and fuel oils.
“They didn’t want anybody to know,” said Horwath, noting the government is probably raking more in with the tax on soaring electricity and gasoline prices in the wake of Middle East revolts pushing the price of crude oil higher almost daily.
But Finance Minister Dwight Duncan denied there is a windfall because money goes back out to consumers in rebates and tax credits.
“Make sure you look at the whole picture.”
The $1.6 billion figure is close to the estimated $1.7 billion the NDP calculated and made political hay with last year.
by Rob Ferguson , Toronto Star
The government is standing idly by as electricity ratepayers get hit in the pocketbook again, opposition parties charged Wednesday in the wake of the latest Ontario Energy Board ruling.
This time it’s a decision that local electrical utilities — on the losing end of a Supreme Court case for charging interest rates of over 60 per cent on late bill payments — can get the $18 million back from customers across the board.
“It’s a scam,” Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak shot at Energy Minister Brad Duguid in the Legislature’s daily question period, saying the Liberals have turned the energy board into “another McGuinty tax collection agency.”
“Why is it when Ontario families even win in the courts you still make them pay the price of illegal activity?”
The typical residential customer will see an extra 20 to 30 cents a month on their electricity bills for two years.
Duguid said the government has directed its transmission utility Hydro One not to charge the money to customers it serves directly and that he “strongly recommends” local utilities across the province will follow that lead.
“It’s a decision they will have to make,” Duguid told reporters, noting all utilities are governed by local boards subject to public pressure.
The government should be standing up for consumers given dramatic increases in electricity prices over the last few years, said New Democrat Leader Andrea Horwath.
“Any minister who expects everybody to just play nice is, I think, a little bit naïve,” she added.
“It’s not a lot of money but, again, it shows nobody’s paying attention to the fact that folks are tapped out and this is another slap in the face.”
Duguid said the high interest charges on late payments date to the early 1980s when the Progressive Conservatives were in power under then-premier Bill Davis, and a lawsuit challenging the practice was subsequently launched in 1998 with a court decision in 2010.
“Governments of all stripes were in power when this was taking place,” he said. “We’re not passing the buck.”
The Supreme Court first ruled in 2004 that late payment penalties charged by natural gas companies exceeded the 60 per cent limit allowed under Canadian law, and legal attention then switched to electric utilities.
They agreed it would be impossible to find and reimburse customers who had paid the exorbitant charges, so the money collected was paid into a United Way fund to help families pay their winter heating bills. The utilities then sought the energy board’s permission to recover the money from all customers, including those who paid their bills on time.
That means even customers who were in good standing get a penalty, said Hudak.
“What a bunch of nonsense.”
Meanwhile, the NDP revealed a freedom-of-information request showing the government expected to take in an extra $1.6 billion a year as the 8 per cent provincial portion of the 13 per cent HST was extended to electricity, gasoline and fuel oils.
“They didn’t want anybody to know,” said Horwath, noting the government is probably raking more in with the tax on soaring electricity and gasoline prices in the wake of Middle East revolts pushing the price of crude oil higher almost daily.
But Finance Minister Dwight Duncan denied there is a windfall because money goes back out to consumers in rebates and tax credits.
“Make sure you look at the whole picture.”
The $1.6 billion figure is close to the estimated $1.7 billion the NDP calculated and made political hay with last year.
Ontario electricity prices to rise again as OPG seeks 6.2 per cent hike March 1
The Canadian Press
TORONTO – Electricity ratepayers in Ontario, already reeling from soaring prices, should brace for yet another increase.
The Ontario Energy Board is expected to rule shortly on a request from Ontario Power Generation for a 6.2 per cent increase in electricity rates effective March 1.
The Liberal government has been under non-stop attack over rising electricity rates, especially since the HST was added to hydro bills last July, but Premier Dalton McGuinty said Tuesday he wouldn’t be directing the OEB on the rate request.
“The OPG request is the kind of thing that will have to be considered by the Ontario Energy Board,” said McGuinty.
The New Democrats predicted increasing electricity bills will cost the Liberals seats in the Oct. 6 election, and said the OPG rate hike would have a major impact on consumers.
“It’s a huge hike and in the context of electricity prices that have already been compounded and then added to by Mr. McGuinty’s HST, it just increases the crushing burden on Ontario families,” said NDP critic Peter Kormos.
“This is crushing Ontario families and is going to be a major issue in the upcoming provincial election, and it’s something around which Mr. McGuinty has no defence for himself and the Liberals whatsoever.”
In the legislature, the Progressive Conservatives accused McGuinty of treating Ontario families “like they’re bottomless ATM machines” when it comes to electricity bills.
“Why do they keep paying more and more for your bungling on the hydro file,” asked Opposition Leader Tim Hudak.
“You just do not respect the fact that Ontario families get stuck with the bills for the expensive mess you’ve created in our hydro policy.”
Hydro One, the giant transmission utility that also acts as a local distribution company for about one million customers, is threatening to cut off power to people it knows are struggling to pay their bills.
“We recognize that some Ontario families are experiencing financial difficulties and having problems paying their utility bills,” wrote Hydro One’s manager of public affairs, Enza Cancilla, Jan. 27.
“We encourage these customers in particular to contact our customer communication centre to discuss payment arrangements and avoid potential disconnection of service.”
OPG produces two-thirds of the province’s electricity, 70 per cent of which is subject to regulated prices set by the energy board.
OPG says a 6.2 per cent increase for its regulated output from nuclear plants and large hydro stations would add about $1.86 to a typical homeowner’s monthly hydro bill.
The government-owned utility originally asked for a 9.6 per cent rate increase, but scaled that back after the Liberal government asked the huge generator and Hydro One to keep increases to a minimum.
OPG is seeking 3.7 cents a kilowatt hour for power generated by its large hydro-electric stations, and 5.3 cents a kwh for its nuclear output. By comparison, Bruce Power was paid a reported 6.3 cents a kwh last year for output from the nuclear reactors it leases from OPG.
The province is paying some solar power generators up to 80 cents a kwh under its controversial Green Energy Act.
Ontario homeowners and small businesses pay between five and 10 cents per kilowatt hour, depending on time and amount of use.
OPG President and CEO Tom Mitchell says the government-owned utility is the lowest-cost energy provider in Ontario and intends to stay that way.
Soaring hydro bills have already prompted the Liberals to introduce 10 per cent rebates this year, but they’re still on the defensive after admitting electricity prices would rise 46 per cent over five years.
The increases are necessary to pay for badly needed repairs and upgrades to Ontario’s electricity system and to phase out all coal-fired generation by 2014, said McGuinty.
“I think most Ontarians now understand that our electricity system was at risk, in a tremendous state of disrepair in our early years, with warnings about an inadequacy of supply,” he said. “We’ll let Ontarians pass judgment on a daily basis and at election time.”
Shutting down the coal plants will save lives and billions of dollars in health care costs caused by pollution, added McGuinty.
The government had to tell 1,000 farmers who invested money to get into solar generation that there’s no room for the electricity they generate on the province’s power grid.
And it recently imposed a moratorium on off-shore wind farms, the same move the Liberals made prior to the 2007 election, which they reversed after winning.
The opposition parties say those reversals and flip flops have left McGuinty and the Liberals with no credibility on the electricity file.
TORONTO – Electricity ratepayers in Ontario, already reeling from soaring prices, should brace for yet another increase.
The Ontario Energy Board is expected to rule shortly on a request from Ontario Power Generation for a 6.2 per cent increase in electricity rates effective March 1.
The Liberal government has been under non-stop attack over rising electricity rates, especially since the HST was added to hydro bills last July, but Premier Dalton McGuinty said Tuesday he wouldn’t be directing the OEB on the rate request.
“The OPG request is the kind of thing that will have to be considered by the Ontario Energy Board,” said McGuinty.
The New Democrats predicted increasing electricity bills will cost the Liberals seats in the Oct. 6 election, and said the OPG rate hike would have a major impact on consumers.
“It’s a huge hike and in the context of electricity prices that have already been compounded and then added to by Mr. McGuinty’s HST, it just increases the crushing burden on Ontario families,” said NDP critic Peter Kormos.
“This is crushing Ontario families and is going to be a major issue in the upcoming provincial election, and it’s something around which Mr. McGuinty has no defence for himself and the Liberals whatsoever.”
In the legislature, the Progressive Conservatives accused McGuinty of treating Ontario families “like they’re bottomless ATM machines” when it comes to electricity bills.
“Why do they keep paying more and more for your bungling on the hydro file,” asked Opposition Leader Tim Hudak.
“You just do not respect the fact that Ontario families get stuck with the bills for the expensive mess you’ve created in our hydro policy.”
Hydro One, the giant transmission utility that also acts as a local distribution company for about one million customers, is threatening to cut off power to people it knows are struggling to pay their bills.
“We recognize that some Ontario families are experiencing financial difficulties and having problems paying their utility bills,” wrote Hydro One’s manager of public affairs, Enza Cancilla, Jan. 27.
“We encourage these customers in particular to contact our customer communication centre to discuss payment arrangements and avoid potential disconnection of service.”
OPG produces two-thirds of the province’s electricity, 70 per cent of which is subject to regulated prices set by the energy board.
OPG says a 6.2 per cent increase for its regulated output from nuclear plants and large hydro stations would add about $1.86 to a typical homeowner’s monthly hydro bill.
The government-owned utility originally asked for a 9.6 per cent rate increase, but scaled that back after the Liberal government asked the huge generator and Hydro One to keep increases to a minimum.
OPG is seeking 3.7 cents a kilowatt hour for power generated by its large hydro-electric stations, and 5.3 cents a kwh for its nuclear output. By comparison, Bruce Power was paid a reported 6.3 cents a kwh last year for output from the nuclear reactors it leases from OPG.
The province is paying some solar power generators up to 80 cents a kwh under its controversial Green Energy Act.
Ontario homeowners and small businesses pay between five and 10 cents per kilowatt hour, depending on time and amount of use.
OPG President and CEO Tom Mitchell says the government-owned utility is the lowest-cost energy provider in Ontario and intends to stay that way.
Soaring hydro bills have already prompted the Liberals to introduce 10 per cent rebates this year, but they’re still on the defensive after admitting electricity prices would rise 46 per cent over five years.
The increases are necessary to pay for badly needed repairs and upgrades to Ontario’s electricity system and to phase out all coal-fired generation by 2014, said McGuinty.
“I think most Ontarians now understand that our electricity system was at risk, in a tremendous state of disrepair in our early years, with warnings about an inadequacy of supply,” he said. “We’ll let Ontarians pass judgment on a daily basis and at election time.”
Shutting down the coal plants will save lives and billions of dollars in health care costs caused by pollution, added McGuinty.
The government had to tell 1,000 farmers who invested money to get into solar generation that there’s no room for the electricity they generate on the province’s power grid.
And it recently imposed a moratorium on off-shore wind farms, the same move the Liberals made prior to the 2007 election, which they reversed after winning.
The opposition parties say those reversals and flip flops have left McGuinty and the Liberals with no credibility on the electricity file.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Hydro hike to pay fine for utility overbilling
By John Spears Wed Feb 23 2011
http://www.moneyville.ca/article/943384--hydro-hike-to-pay-fine-for-utility-overbilling?bn=1
A victory for electricity ratepayers who objected to paying high interest rates on overdue bills will be a loss for those who pay on time.
The Ontario Energy Board has ruled that most of the province’s electric utilities — which under a Supreme court of Canada ruling, had to give away money collected on overdue accounts because the interest rates charged were too high — may get the money back from customers across the board.
As a result, typical residential electricity customers will pay an extra 20 to 30 cents a month on their bills, for a period of one to two years.
Further, the parties agreed that it would be impossible to find and reimburse customers who had paid the high interest rates over decades.
The case, which does not apply to Hydro One’s local customers, dates back to a decision over late penalty payments on natural gas bills. The Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that the late payment penalty charged by the utilities exceeded the 60 per cent limit allowed under Canadian law.
The gas companies, required to give away the excess they’d collectedpaid it into a fund administered by the United Way to help low income families pay winter heating bills.
But the energy board then ruled that the gas utilities could recover their lost revenue by levying a levy a charge on all their customers.
Attention then switched to hydro utilities, which charged similar late payment penalties and faced an action similar to the gas utility case.
They, too, agreed to pay the illegally collected money out into the winter warmth fund and then
They, too, sought to regain it from the rest of their customers.
And they, too, have been successful.
The steep penalty for late bill payments “was itself an action undertaken by the utilities to protect the interests of the large majority of ratepayers who pay their accounts on time,” the board wrote in a decision released Tuesday.
“Delinquent accounts are an important source of costs for utilities, and these costs can only be recovered from ratepayers.”
Since the utilities can’t target the late-payers with big penalties, they’ll have to get the money from all their customers.
The board also argues that the now-outlawed late penalties were used to lower over-all electricity rates.
“Because of the revenues generated by the (late payment penalties), electricity rates were lower than they otherwise would have been,” the board wrote.
Since those revenues are no longer available to reduce rates, the board ruled, utilities should be allowed to increase rates to offset the loss.
The parties agreed that the overpayment across the province came to $17 million; with interest and other items their total costs for the settlement came to $18.4 million.
Toronto Hydro’s share of the overpayment was $7.5 million. It will have a two-year period in which to pay out the money; other utilities across the province must make their payouts within a year.
While the decision makes sense to the energy board, it’s unlikely to satisfy angry ratepayers who protested to the board.
“The costs are solely the result of unethical (if not illegal) conduct by (the utilities’) management teams, and all such costs should be borne directly by the distributors out of their own profits,” wrote Jim Mallar.
“This application is an insult to consumers,” wrote Keith Moyer. “What the utility distributors are now saying is: ‘Sure, we were found guilty, but now we want our money back, including the cost of our high priced lawyers…’”
Jane Cooper wrote: “I vehemently protest any costs or damages…being recovered from ratepayers. This is NOT the ratepayers’ problem and we are already burdened with extreme high costs.”
Sally Wilkie also protested:“I am a ratepayer that pays my bill on time, every time, including the rate increases, HST, debt retirement charges, etc.Am I about to be penalized for the people who pay late and for the management that imposed late payment fees? I and other ratepayers and tax payers should not be held responsible. We plead innocent. DON'T FINE US.”
http://www.moneyville.ca/article/943384--hydro-hike-to-pay-fine-for-utility-overbilling?bn=1
A victory for electricity ratepayers who objected to paying high interest rates on overdue bills will be a loss for those who pay on time.
The Ontario Energy Board has ruled that most of the province’s electric utilities — which under a Supreme court of Canada ruling, had to give away money collected on overdue accounts because the interest rates charged were too high — may get the money back from customers across the board.
As a result, typical residential electricity customers will pay an extra 20 to 30 cents a month on their bills, for a period of one to two years.
Further, the parties agreed that it would be impossible to find and reimburse customers who had paid the high interest rates over decades.
The case, which does not apply to Hydro One’s local customers, dates back to a decision over late penalty payments on natural gas bills. The Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that the late payment penalty charged by the utilities exceeded the 60 per cent limit allowed under Canadian law.
The gas companies, required to give away the excess they’d collectedpaid it into a fund administered by the United Way to help low income families pay winter heating bills.
But the energy board then ruled that the gas utilities could recover their lost revenue by levying a levy a charge on all their customers.
Attention then switched to hydro utilities, which charged similar late payment penalties and faced an action similar to the gas utility case.
They, too, agreed to pay the illegally collected money out into the winter warmth fund and then
They, too, sought to regain it from the rest of their customers.
And they, too, have been successful.
The steep penalty for late bill payments “was itself an action undertaken by the utilities to protect the interests of the large majority of ratepayers who pay their accounts on time,” the board wrote in a decision released Tuesday.
“Delinquent accounts are an important source of costs for utilities, and these costs can only be recovered from ratepayers.”
Since the utilities can’t target the late-payers with big penalties, they’ll have to get the money from all their customers.
The board also argues that the now-outlawed late penalties were used to lower over-all electricity rates.
“Because of the revenues generated by the (late payment penalties), electricity rates were lower than they otherwise would have been,” the board wrote.
Since those revenues are no longer available to reduce rates, the board ruled, utilities should be allowed to increase rates to offset the loss.
The parties agreed that the overpayment across the province came to $17 million; with interest and other items their total costs for the settlement came to $18.4 million.
Toronto Hydro’s share of the overpayment was $7.5 million. It will have a two-year period in which to pay out the money; other utilities across the province must make their payouts within a year.
While the decision makes sense to the energy board, it’s unlikely to satisfy angry ratepayers who protested to the board.
“The costs are solely the result of unethical (if not illegal) conduct by (the utilities’) management teams, and all such costs should be borne directly by the distributors out of their own profits,” wrote Jim Mallar.
“This application is an insult to consumers,” wrote Keith Moyer. “What the utility distributors are now saying is: ‘Sure, we were found guilty, but now we want our money back, including the cost of our high priced lawyers…’”
Jane Cooper wrote: “I vehemently protest any costs or damages…being recovered from ratepayers. This is NOT the ratepayers’ problem and we are already burdened with extreme high costs.”
Sally Wilkie also protested:“I am a ratepayer that pays my bill on time, every time, including the rate increases, HST, debt retirement charges, etc.Am I about to be penalized for the people who pay late and for the management that imposed late payment fees? I and other ratepayers and tax payers should not be held responsible. We plead innocent. DON'T FINE US.”
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
MicroFIT: Paying people to use less grid power.
Some 20,000 applications in Ontario have been submitted to the Province to have solar panels installed. Of those some 3700 are connected. There is no data yet on what these supply in power to the grid nor how much is being paid to these people for that power.
The claim is these people are supplying power to the grid. But are they? Is that the correct way of looking at their set up? I don't think it is.
Let's be clear about these panels. I'm sure you have all seen some of them around the countryside (us rural folk have anyway). The set up is small. Sure, they look big enough. But understand that these panels, if only hooked to the person's house, would not supply the power needs of the home.
Let me state that again. These panels CANNOT supply the power needs of the home. You would need many more of them to be able to do that.
I visited a home in Sarnia about 4 years ago who has 20 panels on his roof (this is before the FIT program). He was supplying about 20% of his home with these panels. But what happens at night? He has 60 batteries. So the panels had to charge the batteries by day AND supply the home's power demand, totalling some 20% over all for the day.
So we can extrapolate that situation to these FIT producers. They are not supplying power to the grid at all (even though they are connected). They are using all of that solar power to offset SOME of what they are using themselves from the grid.
For example (and these are just numbers out of the air until concrete values can be found), a home consumes some 100kWh of power a day. The solar panels, when the sun shines, produces 20kWh of power a day. So this person is charged $0.09/kWh for the 100kWh he uses every day ($9), and gets $.065/kWh for the solar panels ($13). So the person is netting $4 per day for using 20% less off the grid.
Now without the real numbers this is just a ballpark calculation, but you get the picture.
The bottom line is we are paying solar people huge sums of money for them to use a little less of grid power. And at a time when we have excess production.
Now, if they want to use that solar power to offset their hydro bills (that is they get $0.09/kWh) then I would have no problem with that. But not paying them more, not making our power system their personal retirement fund. I heard about one person in Beaverton who was expecting to net $60,000 per year into his retirement from selling power to the grid at $0.65.
Personally, I think he has been duped. I think he will find that the output from these panels is not going to come close to what he was told they would produce, maybe half if lucky. But still, it's just not right that some people can't feed their families because of their hydrobills, but these people get to live a grand retirement contributing to those high bills.
The claim is these people are supplying power to the grid. But are they? Is that the correct way of looking at their set up? I don't think it is.
Let's be clear about these panels. I'm sure you have all seen some of them around the countryside (us rural folk have anyway). The set up is small. Sure, they look big enough. But understand that these panels, if only hooked to the person's house, would not supply the power needs of the home.
Let me state that again. These panels CANNOT supply the power needs of the home. You would need many more of them to be able to do that.
I visited a home in Sarnia about 4 years ago who has 20 panels on his roof (this is before the FIT program). He was supplying about 20% of his home with these panels. But what happens at night? He has 60 batteries. So the panels had to charge the batteries by day AND supply the home's power demand, totalling some 20% over all for the day.
So we can extrapolate that situation to these FIT producers. They are not supplying power to the grid at all (even though they are connected). They are using all of that solar power to offset SOME of what they are using themselves from the grid.
For example (and these are just numbers out of the air until concrete values can be found), a home consumes some 100kWh of power a day. The solar panels, when the sun shines, produces 20kWh of power a day. So this person is charged $0.09/kWh for the 100kWh he uses every day ($9), and gets $.065/kWh for the solar panels ($13). So the person is netting $4 per day for using 20% less off the grid.
Now without the real numbers this is just a ballpark calculation, but you get the picture.
The bottom line is we are paying solar people huge sums of money for them to use a little less of grid power. And at a time when we have excess production.
Now, if they want to use that solar power to offset their hydro bills (that is they get $0.09/kWh) then I would have no problem with that. But not paying them more, not making our power system their personal retirement fund. I heard about one person in Beaverton who was expecting to net $60,000 per year into his retirement from selling power to the grid at $0.65.
Personally, I think he has been duped. I think he will find that the output from these panels is not going to come close to what he was told they would produce, maybe half if lucky. But still, it's just not right that some people can't feed their families because of their hydrobills, but these people get to live a grand retirement contributing to those high bills.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Ontario targets 450% growth in wind capacity
New Energy World Network
The government of Ontario has launched its Long Term Energy Plan calling for an increase in renewable energy developments to 10.7GW by 2018.
The energy plan represents a 450 per cent growth in installed wind capacity in the next seven years, from 1.59GW to 7GW.
The Canadian province has sent mixed messages to the wind power industry this week, making a call to increase the region’s use of wind power after putting a moratorium on all offshore wind projects earlier in the week.
The new energy plan involves the installation of new transmission system upgrades and is expected to lead to the creation of at least 12,500 new jobs.
The plan is also anticipated to lead to more than $12.5bn in new investment in the province, and $22m in annual lease payments to landowners.
Wind energy represents a significant majority of the developments under its energy plan, according to the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA).
CanWEA president Robert Hornung said, ‘Reaffirming the government’s target for new wind energy supply and proceeding quickly with new contracts for wind energy projects and necessary transmission system upgrades will strengthen investor confidence that Ontario is a good place to do business.’
Wind energy has increased ten-fold in the last six years in Canada as governments seek ways to meet rising energy demand, CanWEA said.
The country has more than 4.15GW of installed wind energy capacity, close to 1.59GW of which is in Ontario. Quebec and Alberta each have less than half this level of wind power, with 663MW and 806MW of installed wind capacity, respectively.
The government of Ontario has launched its Long Term Energy Plan calling for an increase in renewable energy developments to 10.7GW by 2018.
The energy plan represents a 450 per cent growth in installed wind capacity in the next seven years, from 1.59GW to 7GW.
The Canadian province has sent mixed messages to the wind power industry this week, making a call to increase the region’s use of wind power after putting a moratorium on all offshore wind projects earlier in the week.
The new energy plan involves the installation of new transmission system upgrades and is expected to lead to the creation of at least 12,500 new jobs.
The plan is also anticipated to lead to more than $12.5bn in new investment in the province, and $22m in annual lease payments to landowners.
Wind energy represents a significant majority of the developments under its energy plan, according to the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA).
CanWEA president Robert Hornung said, ‘Reaffirming the government’s target for new wind energy supply and proceeding quickly with new contracts for wind energy projects and necessary transmission system upgrades will strengthen investor confidence that Ontario is a good place to do business.’
Wind energy has increased ten-fold in the last six years in Canada as governments seek ways to meet rising energy demand, CanWEA said.
The country has more than 4.15GW of installed wind energy capacity, close to 1.59GW of which is in Ontario. Quebec and Alberta each have less than half this level of wind power, with 663MW and 806MW of installed wind capacity, respectively.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)