Library filed under Energy Policy from Canada
Anxious to put a good face on their climb down on green energy, the Liberals touted a so-called $24 per year saving on the average hydro bill as a result of the fact they will now be spending $3.7 billion less of our money on green energy. Your hydro rate isn't going to drop by $24 compared to what it is now. All it means is that, theoretically, going forward, your bill will be $24 less than the even higher number it would have been under the original Samsung deal.
The province's change of heart is partly a response to the backlash over that arrangement - which made electricity bills more expensive ...It is also the latest sign of turbulence in the green-energy industry after the global recession reduced the need for power and an uncertain economy made less costly conventional electricity more attractive than pricey renewables.
While Manitoba's neighbours are building turbines like gangbusters, Manitoba's policy-makers are letting wind power breeze on by. The province is in the seventh year of an unofficial moratorium on turbines, part of a policy change that has quietly wafted in, replacing a pledge to build 1,000 megawatts of wind power by next year.
This is taking into account all these factors that arrive at a figure of 14.14 cents for the cost of a kilowatt-hour produced by the wind industry. This is the most expensive energy in all categories: two and a half times the price of that produced by the central Hydro-Quebec, which he estimated at 5.55 cents per kilowatt-hour.
Most worrying was that while promising to give municipalities more say over where turbines are constructed, that power won't be bestowed until hundreds, perhaps thousands, more industrial wind turbines are erected on Ontario's skyline. This is because projects already navigating the approvals process are unlikely to be subjected to the province's new process.
"It remains to be seen just how, or if, this new direction will have any impact on Pattern and Samsung's project, which already has Feed-in-Tariff approval," Clarke said. "Going forward, if there will be a more inclusive process that engages municipalities, that's fine, but what does it mean for current projects?" ..."The devil will be in the details."
In the Ontario electricity generation sector, this paper shows that selection of an intermittent carbon free wind generator actually increases the carbon emissions by displacing other carbon free generators, nuclear and hydraulic, and requiring the operation of carbon emitting natural gas and even coal generators to provide support for when the intermittent wind generation routinely falls in output. The introduction and conclusion of this paper are shown below. The full paper can be accessed by clicking on the link(s) at the bottom of this page.
Alberta’s electricity grid is characterized as deregulated and thermally dependent with a growing number of wind power facilities. Using a model to simulate both the unit commitment and economic dispatch decisions of the system operator, the total net CO2 reductions that result from the addition of wind energy into a heavily fossil-fuel based grid are estimated, assuming that contingency reserves are provided by part-loaded natural-gas fired units. Increasing wind generation levels lead to increased CO2 levels from reserve energy production but total CO2 levels decline slightly.
Ontario is dropping its feed-in tariff (FIT) programme and will change its local content regulations for wind and solar farms following the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling that they contravened international trade law. Energy minister Bob Chiarelli, announced on Thursday that the province will develop a competitive procurement process for renewable energy projects larger than 500kW in size.
Municipalities will be given a much bigger say in where - or if - renewable energy projects are located, says Ontario energy minister Bob Chiarelli. And Chiarelli said Ontario will abide by a World Trade Organization ruling that the province's made-in-Ontario requirements for renewable energy projects violate trade rules.
The green lobby in Europe is so strong that it has pushed EU politicians to oppose virtually every kind of reliable non-renewable energy. ..."Ordinary families and small and medium-sized businesses are essentially subsidizing the investments of green do-gooders," who can afford to install solar panels on their homes and their businesses. But what's really starting to cause citizens and policy-makers to question their green energy agenda, is that soaring energy costs are driving energy-intensive industries in Europe to move to the United States.
Earlier this month the Fraser Institute published a report sharply critical of one of the flagship policies of the Ontario government, the Green Energy Act (GEA). We found the Act is costing Ontario over $5 billion annually but yields negligible environmental benefits, and that equivalent or greater benefits could have been achieved using conventional pollution control measures at less than one-tenth the cost.
A certain degree of local congestion and general oversupply is often planned into the system. However, given the relatively narrow operating margins of wind and solar projects, typical project leverage ratios and the debt service coverage ratio covenants by which most projects are bound, an annual curtailment of generating capacity of more than one percent can have a devastating impact on project viability.
A deliberate attempt to obscure the cost of those decisions by releasing only partial numbers? Testimony before the justice committee this week has shown the Liberals knew the $40-million cost of the Oakville cancellation that the former energy minister had insisted was the only true cost, in fact, referred only to sunk costs, and that the final bill would actually be much higher.
The Green Energy Act, with its goal of continuing to increase alternative energy as Ontario faces the need to update its power-generating and transmission infrastructure, is being hotly debated by members of the public, municipal councils, provincial politicians and those in the business of creating power. The following are two sides of the energy story.
Last year, Ontario spent millions of dollars paying other states and provinces to take our excess power, most of it from renewables. But the contracts between the province and wind companies gave wind power first dibs on the grid, meaning Ontario was paying other jurisdictions to take some of most expensive power, while spilling cheaper hydroelectric power at Niagara Falls.
The new rules will allow the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) to switch off the flow of power from wind turbines if there's too little demand. Wind operators will be compensated.
Surplus wind power could cost Ontario ratepayers millions and compromise power system, says electricity system operator. It says renewable energy market rules must change. ...The IESO has drawn up new rules that will allow it to shut output from wind and solar operators ...The renewable power generators are fighting the new rules vigorously.
The simple truth is that the Liberals' foolish pursuit of wind power has resulted in the creation of a massive Potemkin Village in Ontario, an outwardly impressive but ultimately useless facade. In the real world, it would have been smarter, cheaper and greener for the Liberals simply to have replaced coal-fired electricity with gas-fired electricity, while completely avoiding the boondoggle of wind.
Wilson and the Ontario PC Party have been calling for a moratorium on industrial wind energy projects until third party health and environmental studies have been done. They have also committed to scrapping the feed-in tariff that is increasing hydro bills by rewarding energy developers up to fifteen times the average price of hydro to produce power no matter if it is needed or not.